To direct the Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security (Transportation Security Administration) to address vulnerabilities in aviation security by carrying out a pilot program to screen airport workers with access to secure and sterile areas of airports, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5982. As a Californian, the State that was once known as the Bear Republic, and proud resident of the State of California, which has the bear flag, I rise in support of the BEAR bill that the gentleman from Mississippi has introduced and brought to the floor today.

The chairman from Mississippi has brought us a bill that seeks to build on work that has already been done in previous Congresses and also with TSA, but I think he gives us a little bit of a push to move in the direction of biometrics.

The Biometric Enhancement for Airport-Risk Reduction Act simply recognizes that as we go forward in trying to secure our airports and the flying public and the cargo from terrorist attack we need to use those things which give us an advantage over those who would do harm to us, and that means we need to have the smart use of technology.

The gentleman from Mississippi has been one of those who has spoken for several years about the fact that we need to get biometrics on board more quickly than we have, and I join the gentleman in that hope. I think this bill will move us in that direction.

People should understand that biometrics merely refers to identifiers. They could be something as simple as fingerprints. They could be iris scans, things of that sort, some medium by which we are able to identify an individual with the documentation that they have. And then if you have readers that are all over the landscape now for various different enterprises, it allows you in an economical and in an efficient way to identify the individuals that are granted access to particular areas, and this is particularly important when we're talking about vast areas that we find at airports.

Airports are not severely confined by geography as are some other enterprises, some other commercial enterprises, where you might be able to more easily secure the area. Particularly when you have airports where you have individuals who are cleared to work there, moving in and out, in and out, in and out of areas which are supposed to be secured areas, you have to find a reasonably efficient means that is also an effective means of identifying those people who should be in those areas and those people who should not be in those areas.

And that is why biometric technology presents such an opportunity for us, and for these and other reasons I would support H.R. 5982.

At this time, I reserve the balance of my time.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, again, in closing, I rise in support of H.R. 5982, the BEAR Act, the Biometric Enhancement for Airport-Risk Reduction Act, brought to us by the chairman of this committee. This is an advancement. This is a push to where we need to go with respect to biometrics.

We ought to understand that the United States is the leader in the world in technology and technology application. We need to do that here as well. And it sometimes seems strange that we don't take advantage of the leadership that we have in applying it to certain areas. The urgency that we need to adopt with respect to the threat that is out there is, I think, shared by this committee, but I'm not sure that it is shared totally by the full Congress, nor by the Federal establishment all together nor, in some cases, by the American people, where, after our successes in forestalling any major terrorist attack on our shores since 9/11, it allows us a certain relaxation that I think is dangerous. The gentleman moves us in the right direction with this bill.

I might say that as we move with this bill I would hope we would move with some other bills on this floor dealing with the threat that we have to our national economy and our national security through our energy dependence on many, many others.

The U.S. is the leader in the potential for oil shale, just as we're the leader in technology in this world. The U.S. might be called the Saudi Arabia of oil shale. According to the Department of Energy, this Nation is endowed with more than 2 trillion barrels of oil. To put this figure in perspective, the world has used 1 trillion barrels of oil since the first oil well was successfully drilled in Pennsylvania in 1859. According to the Department of Energy, let me repeat, we are endowed with more than 2 trillion barrels of oil, and we're talking about U.S. oil shale.

The problem is that we had a rider on an appropriations bill just last year that makes this huge domestic resource off-limits. That would be as silly as us having a bill on the floor that would say, even though we're the leader in biometric technology, we will prohibit its use in the area of airport security. That would make no sense, Mr. Speaker, nor does it make sense for us not to utilize this tremendous resource we have.

So again, Mr. Speaker, I would say that I would encourage all Members to support H.R. 5982, the Biometric Enhancement for Airport-Risk Reduction Act, otherwise known as the BEAR Act, brought to us on this floor by the distinguished gentleman from Mississippi, the chairman of our committee.

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5982) to direct the Secretary of Homeland Security, for purposes of transportation security, to conduct a study on how airports can transition to uniform, standards-based, and interoperable biometric identifier systems for airport workers with unescorted access to secure or sterile areas of an airport, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this bill and yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, last month I introduced H.R. 5982, the Biometric Enhancement for Airport Risk Reduction Act of 2008, also known as the BEAR Act. The bill was marked up and adopted unanimously by the House Committee on Homeland Security on May 20.

The Transportation Security Administration is responsible for securing 450 U.S. airports and employs approximately 50,000 people. It has a very important mission of keeping the traveling public safe from terrorist threats. But the question remains, what is TSA doing to increase security and still allow workers with unescorted access to sterile and secure areas of airports? And what mechanisms are in place to ensure that only the employees are allowed to access the airports' secure and sterile areas.

The BEAR Act addresses these concerns. It requires TSA to provide Congress and airport operators with a report on best practices for using biometrics at airports.

Last November, Federal law enforcement raided Chicago's O'Hare Airport and arrested 23 people for fraudulently securing badges that gave them unescorted access to sensitive airport locations. According to the charging affidavit, more than 100 temporary workers were found to be in possession of fraudulent badges. And the investigation revealed that the staffing agency that sponsored these workers told them that they needed identification, but it did not have to be legitimate.

Today, workers with unescorted access to these critical facilities go through background screening to get identification badges. This background screening includes checking against a terrorist watch list. While this is a necessary and important check, a worker's biometrics are not being captured in check against biographic information to establish the individual's identity.

Since the Chicago incident, there has been a growing international trend to incorporate biometric identifying credentials in airport IDs. Canada and the United Kingdom have already taken action to address the security risk at airports by using biometric identifying credentials for airport workers.

Although I recognize the ongoing work that TSA has been doing in the last year or so, it's time for them to consider moving forward. The BEAR Act will make this happen.

The bill promotes collaboration between TSA industry, labor, and other stakeholders to collectively develop and provide airports with a blueprint on how to make biometrics work for them. The BEAR Act, as amended, includes changes proposed by my colleagues on the other side of the aisle and TSA to improve the bill, including clarifying that TSA should only conduct a risk-based study of Category 10 and Category 1 airports on a selected groups of airports, defining uniform biometric identified systems to make sure that TSA looks at systems that actually match individuals, not just cards, that have biometrics on them, recognizing and not tampering with TSA's ongoing efforts in the area of biometrics such as the TWIC program and other programs.

Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 5982.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey).

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

Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to support this commonsense approach to studying how biometrics can be used to improve airport security.

I think it is important to make clear again, this bill does not create any new mandates on airports. This bill does not require airports to use biometric identifying systems. Instead, it only provides for a study of how biometrics could be used.

I strongly believe that strategic deployment of biometrics in the airport is a sensible part of any layered security plan for the airport environment. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation and make our airports safer.

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

I thank the distinguished gentleman from Mississippi, the chairman of the committee, and I want to thank him and applaud him for this legislation.

As has been indicated on the floor, the importance of ensuring the security and the sanctity of the particular identification, the technology, is key. One of the key problems that we have found in homeland security is, of course, the ability to tamper with the security document or the process. This legislation is an important, enhanced effort to ensure that that does not happen.

I want to thank the chairman for his leadership on this particular issue, and also, I think it's important to note that one of the commitments that homeland security has made is, ``Not on our watch,'' and we have steadfastly looked at all of the elements that need to be improved and enhanced in border security and aviation security to ensure that there are documents that can be, on their face, the kind of document that provides the necessary review and protection for the traveling public and for those who do business in the ports of America.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 5982, the Biometric Enhancement Act for Airport-Risk Reduction Act of 2008, introduced by my distinguished colleague from Mississippi, Chairman Thompson. This important legislation requires TSA to provide Congress and airport operators with a breakdown on best practices for utilizing biometrics to better protect airports.

In the last few months, the Transportation Security Administration, TSA, has unveiled several new programs and initiatives that are proving to build a ``layered approach'' to security. And while the TSA is responsible for the 450 U.S. airports, and employs approximately 50,000, with the very important mission of keeping the traveling public safe from terrorist threats, it has done very little to strengthen airport security for workers with unescorted access to sterile and secure areas of the airport. At the present time, there are few mechanisms in place to ensure that contracted employees follow due diligence at our airports and access is granted to only those employees who belong on airport grounds at any given time. This legislation addresses these key issues by requiring TSA to provide Congress and airport operators with a breakdown on best practices for utilizing biometrics to better protect airports.

Mr. Speaker, only last November, Federal law enforcement raided Chicago's O'Hare International Airport in November 2007 and arrested 23 people for fraudulently securing badges to gain access to sensitive airport locations. According to the charging affidavit, more than 100 temporary workers were found to be in possession of the fraudulent badges and the staffing agency that sponsored these workers told them that they needed identification, but such identification did not have to be legitimate.

While today's workers with unescorted access to this critical infrastructure go through background screening, which includes terror watch list checks, to get issued badges, more must be done. While this is a necessary and important check, a job applicant's biometrics are not being captured to check against biographic information provided to establish the individual's identity. The legislation we have before us today is a smart security approach that promotes collaboration between TSA, industry, labor and other key stakeholders to work together to collectively develop and provide airports with a blueprint on how to make biometrics work for them.

Mr. Speaker, this legislation requires TSA to study how airports can transition to uniform, standards-based and interoperable biometric identifier systems for airport workers with unescorted access. This bill furthermore requires TSA and the working group to examine

existing programs, such as TWIC, and identify approaches on how biometrics can enhance protections for secure and sterile areas of the airport. TSA is also required by this bill to provide Congress and airport operators with a breakdown on best practices for using biometrics to improve airport security.

Mr. Speaker, this bill is not about re-inventing the wheel or putting a stop to any good work at TSA on this issue. It is about encouraging public-private partnerships and promoting an open dialogue between TSA, industry, and Congress on how best to secure our airports. I am proud to support this important and timely legislation, and I encourage my colleagues to join me in so doing.

Mr. Speaker and my colleagues, I had the honor and privilege of chairing the House Aviation Subcommittee for some 6 years. I inherited that responsibility some months after September 11 and concluded my service as the Chair of that important subcommittee January of this year. I now am the ranking member on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.

Just by way of my background, I have been involved in both the creation of TSA and the evolution of TSA over these years, and, trying to make certain, as I know Ms. Ginny Brown-Waite is doing, Representative Nita Lowey is trying to do, and I think they are very well intended and actually I hope to work with them, I just found out about this proposal coming up today last night, and I do pledge to work with them to try to make their intent the most effective intent, protecting the American public. And I know that is what Ms. Ginny Brown-Waite does. That is her intent. And I think that is Mrs. Lowey's intent here.

But what we have got to do is make certain that we aren't doing something that really won't achieve the results. And I think the normal screening of workers, as it has been done as we screen passengers, would not be that effective. So I have no objection to a demonstration project, but I think what we need is one that is sophisticated to try to deal with finding out what the bad intent of supposedly good aviation system workers may be.

Most of what we have at the airport today, I hate to tell you, the technology does not deal with the current threat. The current threat is not someone taking a gun or a weapon, as we traditionally know it, through airport screening checkpoints. In fact, USA Today has shown even how flawed this system is, in revealing some of the results of taking through not only those type items but also other items that may pose a risk today.

The problem we have is people with bad intent who obtain employment in this industry can do great harm. What we need to do is focus the screening on going after that bad intent, because once they get past the worker screening or passenger screening point, a worker has access to chemicals, substances, tools, a treasure trove of items that can be used to take down an aircraft, and that is what we want to prevent.

So I am not going to try to kill this measure. That is not my intent. In fact, I didn't come out here to call for

a roll call vote on this. But what I would like to do is work with them to see that their intent, which is to make certain that workers who may pose danger to the system, we find a way to screen them that would be most effective in protecting our passengers.

The worst thing we can do, and I will tell you this, I helped create the Department of Homeland Security, I helped author the TSA bill. But TSA and the Department of Homeland Security is 177,000 employees. I compare it to sort of like pigeons you may see in a plaza, and when Congress claps its hands, they will all fly off in whatever direction we send them, but it may not always be the best-intended.

I give you one final example. We ban lighters from being carried onboard aircraft. We ban lighters, but we didn't ban cell phones or cameras with a battery. Here's my cell phone. This is much more dangerous as an ignition electronic device than any lighter that you can carry onboard.

So sometimes we do things here with good intentions, like the lighter ban, but they may not have the results we would like to achieve. So I came here to tell both of the sponsors I appreciate what they are trying to do, but I think we can take and craft their demonstration project into a demonstration project that truly screens workers in a way that will be beneficial to catch the potentially bad players and that we can make this system safer.

So I compliment you on your well-intended efforts. I pledge to work with you, and we will take it from there.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1413, to direct the Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security (Transportation Security Administration) to address vulnerabilities in aviation security by carrying out a pilot program to screen airport workers with access to secure and sterile areas of airports, introduced by my distinguished colleague from New York, Representative Lowey. As a member of the Committee on Homeland Security and Chair of the Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure Protect, I believe that this important piece of legislation, of which I am a proud cosponsor, is absolutely imperative for insuring the protection of our nation.

Today, aviation security is high on the list of priorities of air travelers, the Federal Government, and the international air community. Since September 11th we have made many improvements in the security of our nation's transportation infrastructure. However our job is far from over, whether it's more improvements to be made or gaps to close. In matters of security, we must not become complacent--as our enemies adapt, so must we. And we did, we now have a federal screening workforce, we screen 100 percent of the checked baggage, we are in the process of moving to 100 percent screening of air cargo and we are constantly trying to find new technology to help all of these functions. In addition we armed pilots and barricaded the cabin door, still there is much more that needs to be done and this legislation is an important step in the direction of making our nation more secure.

This important legislation includes a number of provisions that will make American airports safer by directing the Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security to implement a number of new programs. In this day and age when Presidential candidates and Members of Congress must go through airport security and screening, it is unfathomable that airport employees with access to sterile areas of the airport are still excused from such screening. This legislation calls for the implementation of a pilot program at five commercial service airports that will screen all airport workers with access to sterile areas of the airport. This program calls for screening of airport employees to be conducted under the same standards as apply to passengers at security screening checkpoints and to be carried out by private screeners at a designated screening lane for their exclusive use at a minimum of two airports. This will ensure that airport employees are held to the same standards as all other people wishing to enter an airport. In order to further ensure security, this bill requires that each airport participating in said program is subject to a vulnerability assessment by the Department of Homeland Security.

An endemic problem in the national security system is the lack of specificity of legislation that is meant to secure our nation's airports. This bill escapes that by specifying that at least two of the participating airports be large hub airports, with the remaining airports representing different airport security risk categories, therefore ensuring a holistic assessment of our airports current security risks. This legislation further specifies that each participating airport operator conduct an assessment of the screening technology used at the airport and to submit the results to the Assistant Secretary. Following this comprehensive program, the United States will be able to better assess the real security of its nation's airports.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to cosponsor H.R. 1413 and I call on my colleagues to support this important piece of legislation because I strongly believe that it will strengthen our nation's efforts to confront the existing vulnerabilities our current airport security system and consequently make our nation more secure.