Expressing sympathy for the citizens of the Philippines dealing with Tropical Storm Ketsana and Typhoon Parma.

Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 829 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to my good friend, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart), and all time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only.

General Leave

I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 829.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, House Resolution 829 provides for consideration of the conference report to accompany H.R. 2892, the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act of 2010. The rule waives all points of order against the conference report and against its consideration. The rule provides that the conference report shall be considered as read. And finally, the rule provides that the previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervention of any motion, except 1 hour of debate and one motion to recommit, if applicable.

This conference report appropriates over $42 billion in funds necessary to protect the American people and enhance our national security. Through terrorist threat mitigation, natural disaster response, and immigration enforcement, this appropriations bill provides the funding to fulfill the many essential responsibilities of a range of important governmental agencies, from the Coast Guard to FEMA to Customs and Border Protection to the Transportation Security Administration.

Particularly critical in this legislation are the partnerships established with State and local communities to prepare for and protect against a range of emergency situations, including natural disasters and acts of terrorism and violence. The funding provided for emergency response resources demonstrates the need for collaboration among Federal, State, and local governments in providing for effective security. It's worth noting a few of the major initiatives contained in this conference report.

This legislation helps secure our borders by providing over $10 billion for Customs and Border Protection, including funding for over 20,000 Border Patrol agents, which represents an increase of 6,000 agents since 2006. In addition, this report extends authorization of the E-Verify program for 3 years, under which employers are able to check the legal status of their workers. This legislation provides the funding to operate and improve the existing E-Verify program.

Ensuring the safety and security of our Nation's infrastructure is a critical part of this legislation. This conference report provides the necessary funding to the Transportation Security Administration and the Coast Guard to protect our Nation's vast transportation network, including airports, seaports, subways, trains, and buses. With this funding, the TSA will be able to improve explosive detection equipment at airports, and the Coast Guard will be able to replace aging ships and aircraft, which is much needed, modernizing a force that is essential to our national security.

Madam Speaker, I have always praised the Federal Emergency Management program for the fine work they do in helping distressed communities. In my home State of Florida, we are frequently plagued with natural disasters, including hurricanes and flooding. These disasters profoundly impact Florida's residents, particularly when so many individuals and families experience severe damage to their homes and communities.

I'm pleased with the funding levels indicated in this report for the firefighter grants, flood map modernization, predisaster mitigation, and emergency food and shelter programs. I know that the men and women at FEMA work hard and are dedicated to relieving the plight of Americans faced with the hardships of natural disasters.

At the same time, I've never been shy about making my voice heard on matters important to my constituents and all residents of Florida and our Nation that experience disasters. I have been outspoken on the need for FEMA to improve temporary housing.

I'm also pleased to have included language in this bill requiring the Florida Long Term Recovery Office, located in Orlando, to remain open. And a footnote there, Representatives Alan Grayson and Suzanne Kosmas are deserving of a lot of consideration from

us for that action that I, along with Robert Wexler and others, began quite some time before they came to Congress. In order to enhance communication and relief operations, this is necessary in the event of a natural disaster.

Madam Speaker, I do want to address the provisions in this report relating to the detainees at Guantanamo Bay. I know that this body has been very focused on this matter, as rightly we should be, as President Obama has committed his administration to close the detention facility at Guantanamo by January of 2010. This conference report prohibits current detainees from being transferred to the United States, except to be prosecuted, and then only after Congress receives a detailed plan on the risks involved, the legal rationale for their transfer, and a notification from the Governor of the affected State.

This is all well and good, but the language in this bill, while a good step forward, is not going to solve the problem of what to do with the hundreds of individuals we have detained, and those in the future that we may have to detain, whether they are detained at Guantanamo or Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan or any other facility where they may be detained by the United States.

The debate over Guantanamo, in my opinion, is missing the larger picture, and that is a need to reform our entire detainment policy. As I have maintained, the problem is policy, not the place. Without a system of justice to deal with suspected terrorists, wherever they are held, we are left with a broken system that has been a significant recruiting tool for al Qaeda and other groups which threaten our Nation's security. We need to deny them that image of America.

We need a judicial process that accomplishes at least three things: Number 1, protects our national security by holding and prosecuting those who have committed crimes or who pose an imperative threat to our country; number 2, upholds international standards of human rights; and 3, strengthens our Nation's image as a country that upholds the rule of law and does not resort to arbitrary justice, even while under threat.

This appropriations season has, so far, brought forth a number of bills, almost all with language relating to Guantanamo and a whole lot of that ``not in my backyard'' stuff. At some point soon, we're going to need to move beyond trying to legislate this matter into appropriations bills and, instead, deal with what is necessary, and that is, new policies and guidelines to bring our national security needs in line with our historic national values.

I'm pleased to have introduced H.R. 3728, the Detainment Reform Act, which will move us forward on this matter, and I urge my colleagues and the President and his administration to give some vent to supporting this effort, revising it, or doing what is necessary in order for this bill or others to establish the policy that's needed for detaining individuals who would be imperative threats or conduct themselves in a criminal manner against this Nation.

Madam Speaker, ultimately, the conference report before us today provides the necessary funding for the Federal, State, and local agencies, programs and efforts that will protect our Nation.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased and privileged at this time to yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from New York, the distinguished Chair of the Committee on Rules and my good friend, Ms. Louise Slaughter.

Madam Speaker, I especially appreciate the remarks of the distinguished woman, the Rules Chair, Ms. Slaughter, and echo her sentiments.

I am now pleased to yield 3 minutes to my colleague from the Rules Committee, a good friend, Jared Polis of Colorado.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, the men and women of the numerous agencies under the Homeland Security umbrella are dedicated and hardworking public servants who deserve the full support of this body. We have a responsibility to provide them with the funds necessary to perform activities essential to protecting our country--preparing for emergencies, mitigating natural disasters and defending against acts of terrorism and violence.

I commend our colleagues on both sides of the aisle on the Appropriations Committee with reference to discharging their functions. I especially commend Subcommittee Chair Price and the work that he and his committee have done. As well, I commend the distinguished chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, Bennie Thompson from Mississippi, and the extraordinary Members who serve with him in that capacity.

As I've discussed before, Madam Speaker, I hope this body will move beyond the debate of whether or not to close Guantanamo and, instead, will work to develop comprehensive detainment policies that uphold Federal law and the United States Constitution, that uphold human rights and international law.

I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the rule.

The material previously referred to by Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart of Florida is as follows:

Amendment to H. Res. 829 Offered by Mr. Diaz-Balart

At the end of the resolution, insert the following new

section:

Sec. 2. On the third legislative day after the adoption of

this resolution, immediately after the third daily order of

business under clause 1 of rule XIV and without intervention

of any point of order, the House shall proceed to the

consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 554) amending the

Rules of the House of Representatives to require that

legislation and conference reports be available on the

Internet for 72 hours before consideration by the House, and

for other purposes. The resolution shall be considered as

read. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on

the resolution and any amendment thereto to final adoption

without intervening motion or demand for division of the

question except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and

controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the

Committee on Rules; (2) an amendment, if offered by the

Minority Leader or his designee and if printed in that

portion of the Congressional Record designated for that

purpose in clause 8 of rule XVIII at least one legislative

day prior to its consideration, which shall be in order

without intervention of any point of order or demand for

division of the question, shall be considered as read and

shall be separately debatable for twenty minutes equally

divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent; and

(3) one motion to recommit

which shall not contain instructions. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX

shall not apply to the consideration of House Resolution 554.

I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Madam Speaker, I'd like to thank my good friend and fellow cochairman of the Florida Congressional Delegation, Mr. Hastings, for the time. I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, several years ago I had the distinct privilege to bring to this floor, first, the rule bringing the legislation to the floor that created the Department of Homeland Security, and then the first rule for a Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill. Since then, the Department of Homeland Security has begun to mature. It has improved the process for which it was created, the oversight of and coordination of many departments related to the safety of the Nation.

As we know, the department was created in the wake of the attacks of September 11, 2001, to help mobilize and to organize the government to the best of its ability to secure the homeland from further terrorist attacks, to protect the Nation's borders, and to prepare for natural disasters. And thanks to our new concerted approach, I think we've made key investments to secure the United States from further terrorist attacks.

But clearly we must not let our guard down.

Just a few weeks ago, we heard about a disrupted terrorist attack in New York City. The Attorney General of the United States has called the plot, ``one of the most serious in the United States since September 11, 2001.'' That is why I am pleased that the underlying legislation provides the Department with the tools and resources that it needs in order to continue to help to protect the Nation from other terrorist attacks. We must not lose our focus. We must continue our efforts to protect the United States from deadly attacks.

This legislation will provide much-needed funding to help secure our borders, with $800 million for Southwest border investments, over $3 billion for the Border Patrol, including over 20,000 Border agents, an increase of more than 50 percent since 2006.

The State that I am honored to represent, Florida, has seen, as my dear friend has pointed out, its share of natural disasters, from Hurricane Andrew in 1992 to the series of very disastrous back-to-back hurricanes in the middle of this decade. That is why having a prepared and professional staff at FEMA, ready to coordinate disaster preparedness, response, recovery and mitigation efforts, is of vital importance to Florida.

I am pleased the conference report will provide FEMA and the new FEMA administrator--we Floridians are very proud of him, Craig Fugate--the resources needed to help in the aftermath of any natural disaster, whether it's a hurricane in Florida, an earthquake in California, or the flooding in the Midwest.

The terrorist attacks of September 11 heightened concerns regarding aviation security. In response, Congress passed the Aviation and Transportation Security Act of 2001. That legislation established a Federal screener workforce and required the screening of all checked baggage using explosive detection systems, EDS. EDS machines can quickly determine if a baggage contains a potential threat. If a weapon or explosive is detected, the machines alert security officers so they can manage the baggage appropriately.

Funding and reimbursement for EDS installation, however, continues to be a serious concern. Miami International Airport, which is in my congressional district, has incurred over $78 million in in-line EDS terminal modification costs and continues to seek reimbursement for the Federal share of those costs. I am pleased that this conference report provides $778 million in discretionary funding to purchase and install EDS at airports. Those funds will help reimburse Miami International Airport and other airports in their efforts to complete EDS installations.

Our Nation's maritime industry contributes approximately $750 billion to the gross domestic product each year. Florida has some of the largest ports in the country. The Port of Miami serves as the primary maritime gateway to Latin America and the Caribbean. It is a strategic hub for international commerce throughout the hemisphere, and obviously it is the cruise ship capital of the word.

Since 9/11, the Port of Miami has faced unprecedented security costs due to the expense of complying with Federal security mandates. While ports across the Nation are facing similar challenges, the problem at the Port of Miami is particularly serious. Annual operating security costs at the Port of Miami have increased from just over $4 million in 2001 to over $20 million today.

The legislation we are bringing to the floor provides $300 million in grants to assist ports in enhancing their security measures to prevent, detect, and respond to possible terrorist attacks.

So I wish to thank Chairman Price and Ranking Member Rogers for their clearly bipartisan work on this conference report that makes critical investments in the priorities facing the Department of Homeland Security, including securing our transportation

systems, strong border security, a well-prepared and able FEMA, and so much more.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I very much appreciate the contributions during this debate, enlightening our colleagues with regard to the merits of the legislation that we are bringing to the floor today.

You know, one of the, I think, most interesting aspects of the American representative democracy is that we differ from other representative democracies probably because our two parties are, in effect, great coalitions. We have a two-party system by virtue of that; both parties represent different coalitions of thought on numerous issues.

So it's interesting that today, for example, while my friend and the distinguished chairwoman of the Rules Committee expressed an opinion contrary to the position maintained by the President of the United States on an important issue--and I think it's appropriate to do so--I commend the President of the United States for his position with regard to the release of detainee photos.

The legislation before us codifies the President's decision to allow the Secretary of Defense to bar the release of detainee photos. I commend the President because, obviously, his leadership and support on that aspect has been decisive in the inclusion of that provision in this legislation.

So our system is unique. This constant manifestation of our two great coalitions is fascinating to me as a student of comparative politics. It is another reason I am so proud of this body--the great sovereign Congress of the United States which represents the most sovereign and the freest people in the world, the American people.

Madam Speaker, over the last few months, the American people have written and called their Members of Congress or they've made their opinions known at meetings throughout the Nation. They've asked their Members of Congress whether they will pledge to read bills before they vote on them. The reason is, I think, that people were outraged after finding out that the majority leadership forced Congress to vote on a number of sweeping and expensive bills without giving Members time to understand or to really even read the bills.

I remember a very glaring example of that when we on the Rules Committee were faced with an entire new bill on this legislation that was known as cap-and-trade, which in effect became a manager's amendment to the legislation at 3 o'clock in the morning, and a few hours after that, we were here voting on it. We were forced to vote on the final so-called ``stimulus'' bill, on the omnibus appropriations bill and, as I mentioned, on that cap-and-trade bill with less than 24 hours to read them--in some instances, as I mentioned before with regard to cap-and-trade, much, much less than 24 hours. Many people believe that that is no way to run the House, and many constituents are rightly upset.

A recent survey found that over 80 percent of Americans believe that legislation should be posted online and in final form and should be available for everyone to read before Congress votes on legislation. You would think, Madam Speaker, that this would really not be an issue as the distinguished Speaker is on record as saying, ``Members should have at least 24 hours to examine bills and conference reports before floor consideration.'' It's even on her Web site. Yet, often, the majority leadership have refused to live up to their pledge.

That is why a bipartisan group of 182 Members of this House has signed a discharge petition to consider a bill that would require that all legislation and conference reports be made available to Members of Congress and to the general public for 72 hours before they are brought to the House floor for a vote.

So, today, I will be asking for a ``no'' vote on the previous question so that we can amend this rule and allow the House to consider that legislation--House Resolution 544, a bipartisan bill by my colleagues and friends, Representatives Baird and Culberson.

I know that Members are concerned that this motion may jeopardize the Department of Homeland Security's Appropriations conference report, but I would like to make clear that the motion I am making provides for the separate consideration of the Baird-Culberson bill within 3 days so that we can pass the conference report today funding the Department of Homeland Security. Then, once we are done, we would consider House Resolution 544.

Having said that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

I would like to thank my colleague from Florida for the time, as well as Chairman Price for his leadership in bringing the fiscal year 2010 Homeland Security appropriations bill to the floor. It reflects the hard work of Chairman Price over the past year, and I am grateful that I have the opportunity to comment on the committee's efforts here today.

I want to reiterate the gratitude that I first expressed towards Chairman Price and his staff during our colloquy earlier this year with Congresswoman Roybal-Allard regarding alternatives to detention.

This bill is about security and stability. One of the issues that we raised the profile of is alternatives to detention, a less costly way of detaining noncriminal immigrants.

There really is a human rights crisis right in our own midst in this Nation. We are holding over 30,000 noncriminal aliens, people like you and me. They lack documentation, but they have committed no criminal crime. They might have been speeding, been picked up from a speeding ticket; they could have been in the wrong place loitering at the wrong time.

And you and I and every other taxpayer are putting them up to the tune of $130 a day, average cost $30,000. Many of them remain in detention for 6 months, 9 months. I had the opportunity to visit a detention facility in Aurora, Colorado. I talked to people who had been there a year and a half, a year and a half away from their families, a year and a half at taxpayer expense.

I would like to applaud the Obama administration for supporting alternatives to detention. Our bill funds alternatives to detention at $70 million, lowers cost using ankle bracelets, more humane, allowing people to remain with their families, $30 a day average cost. This provides a glimpse of what we can accomplish if we work together.

It also underlines the critical importance of passing comprehensive immigration reform. If we can pass comprehensive immigration reform, I know that in future versions of the Homeland Security bill we can save money and have a more humane bill and focus the bill on Homeland Security where it should be focused, which is keeping our Nation safe, not as a back door to dealing with the failures of our broken immigration system.

Thank you, Chairman Price, for your leadership in bringing the FY 2010 Homeland Security Appropriations bill to the floor. It reflects your hard work over the past year and I am grateful that I had the opportunity to support the committee's efforts to get here today. I want to reiterate the gratitude that I first expressed towards you and your staff during our colloquy with Congresswoman Roybal-Allard on detention alternatives earlier this year.

This bill is about security and stability. It furthers the need to secure our borders by guaranteeing the stability of our immigration services' contributions. It provides the funding necessary to continue America's leadership in providing a safe home for both Americans and all future Americans.

Thus, $122 million above 2009 levels is provided to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for its important work. Examples of such important work that will be carried on thanks to this bill are many: $50 million goes to process refugee applications and asylum

claims so that our Nation may continue to admit those in greatest need; $11 million expands immigrant integration and outreach to help with pressing need once these immigrants are lawfully admitted; and $5 million ensures the naturalization of immigrants serving in our armed services.

Funding for detention beds as well as language requiring their maintenance ensures that immigrants will be humanely accommodated while their cases are adjudicated. And more importantly, $70 million goes to Alternatives to Detention--to expand this program nationwide. This steers us in the right direction--a direction of commonsense, cost- saving, and humane measures. It provides a glimpse into what we can accomplish if we continue to work together toward comprehensive immigration reform.

This bill only asks our immigrants one thing--to embrace our cherished tradition of the rule of law in the pursuit of freedom. As a result, this bill provides 3-year authorization extensions for all the immigrants that make ours a greater nation. From religious workers who strengthen our social fabric, to investors who create much-needed jobs while increasing overall credit availability, to rural-serving doctors, to refugees, all are covered in the FY 2010 Homeland Security bill.

While many provisions in this bill greatly improve our detention policies, there is still much to be done and I look forward to a concrete plan for the closing of our Guantanamo Bay facilities.

I once again thank Chairman Price and I look forward to working with you and your staff in the future.

I thank my colleague for yielding.

Madam Speaker, there are few things that say more about our country and our trust in the public's right to know than the Freedom of Information Act. It is one of the most powerful statements of openness and transparency that we have. It affords ordinary people the ability to peer behind the curtains of power and see inside the many bureaucracies that define the Federal, State and local governments in this country. It is a symbol for all, that despite anything else that our government does in the name of the people, there should be no secrets.

Over the years, FOIA laws have been used for a wide range of purposes. FOIA helped us to discover the ugly truth about the use of Agent Orange in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia during the 1960s. And FOIA was also used to uncover data showing that Ford Pintos were built with serious dual system defects that made them more prone to fire and explosions.

In some ways, FOIA is simply a reminder to the public that there is an avenue to pursue if they believe the government is keeping a secret. At the heart of FOIA is the concept that the people's right to know is more important than the government's desire to keep things secret.

The FOIA laws in this country have enabled reporters and citizens from all spectrums access to information that otherwise might never see the light of day. Signed into law by President Johnson in 1966, the FOIA laws allow for the full or partial disclosure of information and documents with only a narrow list of important exemptions.

And so it was with some dismay when I learned recently that the House and Senate conferees on the Homeland Security appropriations bill had slipped in a provision that gives the government the option of making old photos of detainee abuse exempt from the FOIA laws.

This case has already followed a lengthy path beginning with a lawsuit filed by the ACLU against the Pentagon. Last spring, when it appeared that the lawsuit might go against the government, the administration responded by asking some Members of the House and Senate to insert language into the legislation to make sure that the photos stay secret.

Joining the ACLU against the Pentagon was the American Society of News Editors, the Associated Press, Cable News Network, Inc., the E.W. Scripps Company, Gannett Co., Inc., the Hearst Corporation, Military Reporters and Editors, the National Press Club, NBC Universal, Inc., The New York Times Company, the Newspaper Association of America, the Newspaper Guild--CWA, the Radio-Television News Directors Association, the Society of Professional Journalists, The Washington Post, and me.

Never mind that the photos in question likely have very little value given that a similar set of photos showing the abuse were released under the Bush administration. Despite some complaints that releasing photos would place service men and women in danger, the fact is there was absolutely no increase in violence or attacks after the previous detainee photos were released. I assume that if we were to release the new photos, the result would be the same. Americans were simply able to find out what was being done in their name.

Many observers argue that releasing the photos was actually a clear break from the abuses of the past and a signal to our allies and to everyone else that the days of this type of detainee mistreatment were over and that the United States is willing to come to terms with past practices. Indeed, we have said so.

In June, I and other House leaders prevailed and the FOIA exemption was dropped from the legislation. However, the conferees, apparently under direct orders, quietly put it back into the bill this month. It's hard for me to express how disappointed I am with that decision. I am sorry because I believed that we had turned a page from the cloud of suspicion and secrecy that marked the previous administration. It runs so counter to our principles and stated desire to reject abuses of the past.

The FOIA laws in this country form a pillar of our First Amendment principles. It is unfortunate, given that this administration promised that openness and transparency would be the norm. We should never do anything to circumvent FOIA, and I believe our country would gain more by coming to terms with the past than we would by covering it up.

I hope the President will follow judicial rulings and consider voluntarily releasing these photos so we can put this chapter in history behind us.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 800) expressing sympathy for the citizens of the Philippines dealing with Tropical Storm Ketsana and Typhoon Parma, 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 resolution under consideration.

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

Mr. Speaker, this resolution extends our profound sympathies and condolences to the good people of the Philippines for the terrible losses they suffered as a result of Tropical Storm Ketsana and Typhoon Parma. I would like to thank my good friend and colleague, Representative Jackie Speier from California, for her leadership in introducing this important legislation.

On September 26, Typhoon Ketsana brought the heaviest rainfall in 40 years, leaving 80 percent of Manila under water. The storm killed more than 330 people, left nearly 40 missing, forced more than 135,000 families into evacuation centers, and destroyed or badly damaged nearly 40,000 houses. Eight days later, Typhoon Parma hit the Philippines, causing further destruction in areas that were still saturated by the previous storm and resulting in the loss of an additional 28 lives.

I certainly would like to express my deepest condolences and sympathies to the families who lost their loved ones in the storms and to those who were injured and displaced from their homes. It is my sincere hope that the good people of the Philippines will find strength and solace knowing that the world stands by them in these very trying times.

The United States and the Philippines continue to maintain close ties based upon historical relations, common interests, and shared values. The Filipino American community is the second largest Asian American group in the United States, and they make an invaluable contribution to our own country here in America.

This resolution reflects our steadfast commitment to this relationship, as well as our strong desire for a speedy recovery of our friends in the Philippines who are suffering from the aftermaths of these two major natural disasters.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the author and the sponsor of this important legislation, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Speier).

Mr. Speaker, I do thank the gentlewoman and the author of this resolution, Ms. Speier, for her most eloquent statement. I thank her also for her offered help concerning what happened in my own district in American Samoa.

At this time, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Chu).

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from the Northern Mariana Islands (Mr. Sablan).

Mr. Speaker, how much time do we have left?

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Hawaii (Ms. Hirono).

Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers at this time.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.