A bill to allow the funding for the interoperable emergency communications grant program established under the Digital Television Transition and Public Safety Act of 2005 to remain available until expended through fiscal year 2012, and for other purposes.

Mr. President, security and liberty are both essential in our free society. Benjamin Franklin wrote: ``Those who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.'' I have been mindful of this since the devastating attacks of September 11, and each time we have considered the USA PATRIOT Act. The American people of today and those of tomorrow--our children and grandchildren--depend on us to do our best to ensure both security and the preservation of our essential liberties.

After September 11, the Government's power to gather information about those suspected of, or connected to, potential terrorists increased. Because such surveillance may, sometimes by mistake, sweep in U.S. citizens, we must vigilantly monitor these laws to ensure that they are implemented appropriately. This calls for public, judicial and congressional oversight to make sure we maintain the proper respect for security and liberty.

After September 11, I introduced the USA PATRIOT Act, Patriot Act, to give the Government the tools needed to defend this country and aggressively pursue those who would do us harm. Even in those dark days, I insisted on oversight. Working with the then House Majority Leader, Republican Dick Armey, we included sunsets for some of the provisions of the bill that had the greatest potential to directly affect Americans.

We debated the reauthorization of the Patriot Act for several months in 2005 and 2006. I again fought to protect the civil liberties and constitutional rights of Americans. Unfortunately, after a series of short extensions, the reauthorization of 2006 lacked sufficient constitutional protections over the vast authorities it granted to the Government. I had worked to secure increased oversight and to include new sunsets in the bill.

With those sunsets expiring on December 31, 2009, we must once again consider the Patriot Act. Three provisions of the Patriot Act are slated to expire at the end of this year, including the authorization for roving wiretaps, the ``lone wolf'' measure, and orders for tangible things, commonly referred to as the ``library'' provision.

In March, I sent Attorney General Holder a letter requesting the administration's views on these expiring provisions. I reiterated that request at a Senate Judiciary Committee oversight hearing in June. I have recently received a letter from the Attorney General urging us to extend the expiring authorities. I appreciate the President and the Attorney General's emphasis on accountability and checks and balances, and their willingness to consider additional ideas.

Today I am introducing a bill with Senators Cardin and Kaufman that does just that. It will extend the authorization of the three expiring provisions. The bill also updates checks and balances by increasing judicial review of the use of Government powers that capture information on U.S. citizens, and augments congressional oversight. We propose increasing Government accountability through more transparent public reporting of the use of surveillance, and by requiring audits of how these vast authorities have been used since they were last reauthorized. In addition, we propose that, given their extensive use abuse and intrusiveness, we include a sunset for National Security Letters, NSLs. I introduced a bill in 2006, after the most recent Patriot Act reauthorization, to impose a sunset on NSLs. This sunset provision, combined with a comprehensive audit by the Inspector General, will help to hold the Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, accountable in its use of this authority.

In developing this bill, I worked closely with Senators Feingold and Durbin to protect the rights and privacy of Americans, and to expand oversight. Senators Feingold and Durbin have worked tirelessly over the years to protect the civil liberties of Americans, from the first debate over the Patriot Act in 2001, to the reauthorization in 2006, to the FISA Amendments Act enacted last year. I am pleased that Senators Cardin, Kaufman and I have adopted some of the concepts they proposed in the SAFE Act of 2005, and that were included in the broader Patriot Act reauthorization bill they introduced last week, the JUSTICE Act.

I have long been concerned over the issuance and oversight of NSLs. National Security Letters are, in effect, a form of administrative subpoena. They do not require approval by a court, grand jury, or prosecutor. They are issued in secret, with recipients silenced, under penalty of law. Yet NSLs allow the Government to collect sensitive information, such as personal financial records. As Congress expanded the NSL authority in recent years, I raised concerns about how the FBI handles the information it collects on Americans. I noted that, with no real limits imposed by Congress, the FBI could store this information electronically and use it for large-scale, data-mining operations. We now know that the NSL authority was significantly misused. In 2008 the Department of Justice Inspector General issued a report on the FBI's use of NSLs revealing serious over-collection of information and abuse of the NSL authority.

We should reconsider the breadth of the NSL authority. This bill would also impose more judicial oversight and higher standards on the issuance of NSLs. It would require the FBI to include a statement of facts articulating why the information it is seeking is relevant to an authorized investigation.

The bill also addresses the constitutional deficiency recently identified by the Second Circuit Court of appeals in Doe v. Musasey. The Second Circuit found that the nondisclosure, or ``gag orders,'' issued under NSLs are a constitutional infringement. I have long maintained that position. The bill establishes a procedure whereby the recipient of an NSL has 21 days to notify the Government that it wishes to challenge the nondisclosure requirement. The Government then has 21 additional days to apply for a court order to compel compliance with the nondisclosure requirement. This scheme corrects the constitutional defects found by the Second Circuit. The bill would shift the burden of defending the need for a gag order to the Government. This bill also eliminates the NSL nondisclosure provision that allows the Government to ensure itself of victory by certifying that, in its view, disclosure ``may'' endanger national security or ``may'' interfere with diplomatic relations. The bill further strengthens judicial review of nondisclosure or ``gag orders'' associated with NSLs by imposing a one- year limitation on such orders. To protect on-going law enforcement investigations, it permits renewals of the nondisclosure orders in appropriate cases.

The power of the government to collect records for tangible things under Section 215 of the original Patriot Act, commonly referred to as the ``library records'' provision, is another authority that I worked to reform during the last reauthorization. It is time to redefine the way we describe this authority to accurately reflect the broad scope of information it allows the government to collect. Section 215 allows the FISA court to secretly require any entity to produce any document or other tangible thing with a minimal standard of relevance and a presumption in favor of the Government's showing of relevance. This bill correctly identifies Section 215 orders as orders for ``tangible things'' as opposed to only for ``business records'' as it is in current law.

This bill adopts the reasonable constitutional standard that I supported in 2006 for 215 orders. First, it would eliminate the presumption in favor of the government's assertion that the records it is seeking are relevant to its investigation. This bill would require the Government to make a connection between the records or other things it seeks and a suspected terrorist or spy before it is able to obtain confidential records such as library, medical and telephone records. Section 215 orders for tangible things permit the Government to collect an even broader scope of information than NSLs. For that reason, it is critical that the Government show that the records it seeks are both relevant to an investigation and connected to at least a suspected terrorist or spy.

This bill would also establish more meaningful judicial review of Section 215 orders. First, it repeals the requirement in current law that requires a recipient of a Section 215 nondisclosure order to wait for a full year before challenging that gag order. There is no justification for this mandatory waiting period for judicial review, and this bill eliminates it. It also repeals a provision added to the law in 2006 stating that a conclusive presumption in favor of the Government shall apply where a high level official certifies that disclosure of the order for tangible things would endanger national security or interfere with diplomatic relations. These restraints on meaningful judicial review are unfair, unjustified, and completely unacceptable. I fought hard to keep these two provisions out of the 2006 reauthorization, but the Republican majority at that time insisted they be included.

This bill will strengthen court oversight of Section 215 orders by requiring court oversight of minimization procedures when information concerning a U.S. person is acquired, retained, or disseminated. Requiring FISA Court approval of minimization procedures would simply bring Section 215 orders in line with other FISA authorities--such as wiretaps, physical searches,

and pen register and trap and trace devices--that already require FISA court approval of minimization procedures. This is another common sense modification to the law that was drafted in consultation with Senators Feingold and Durbin. If we are to allow personal information to be collected in secret, the court must be more involved in making sure the authorities are used responsibly and that Americans' information and personal privacy are protected.

Finally, this bill addresses concerns over the use of pen register or trap and trace devices ``pen/trap''. The bill raises the standard for pen/trap in the same manner as it raises the standard for Section 215 orders. The Government would be required to show that the information it seeks is both relevant to an investigation and connected to a suspected terrorist or spy. This section also requires court review of minimization procedures, which are not required under current law, and adds an Inspector General audit of the use of pen/trap that is modeled on the the audits of Section 215 orders and NSLs.

I look forward to working with the members of the Judiciary Committee, the Senate, the House and with the administration as this bill moves forward, and I welcome the views of others.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 787) expressing support for designation of October 13, 2009, as National Metastatic Breast Cancer Awareness Day.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material in the Record.

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

I rise today in strong support of House Resolution 787. This resolution expresses support for designating October 13, 2009, as National Metastatic Breast Cancer Awareness Day.

Metastatic breast cancer refers to stage IV breast cancer, the most advanced stage of this form of cancer. At this point, cancer cells have spread beyond the breast and underarm lymph nodes to other areas of the body. Sadly, there is no cure for breast cancer once it has reached this stage.

Breast cancer is the second most commonly diagnosed cancer in women. The National Institutes of Health estimates that nearly 195,000 new cases will be diagnosed in 2009, the majority of which occur among women. Nearly 30 percent of women diagnosed with early stage breast cancer will develop metastatic breast cancer; and despite this startling statistic, advanced breast cancer is rarely discussed during National Breast Cancer Awareness Month.

This resolution supports designation of National Metastatic Breast Cancer Awareness Day. It encourages all people in the U.S. to become more informed and aware of metastatic breast cancer and requests that the Clerk of the House transmit a copy of this resolution to the Metastatic Breast Cancer Network.

Earlier this month, my subcommittee held a hearing on four pieces of legislation that focus on prevention, early diagnosis, and treatment of breast cancer. During this hearing, we heard from four of my colleagues who have sponsored legislation to address this important health issue. Those are Congressman Nadler, Congresswoman DeLauro, who is also the sponsor of this resolution today, Congresswoman Wasserman Schultz, and Congresswoman Castor. We also heard testimony from a number of advocacy groups and the National Cancer Institute.

Mr. Speaker, this hearing and the resolution before us today underscore the importance of early detection of breast cancer and ensuring that, once diagnosed, women receive the best quality treatment available. As House Resolution 787 highlights, it's especially important that women with metastatic breast cancer feel supported rather than feeling isolated or ignored.

As National Breast Cancer Awareness Month draws to a close, I would like to take this opportunity to comment on the important issues raised with respect to the experience of breast cancer patients in today's medical environment. These patients and many others lack access to preventive services that are recommended by experts. Many patients lack coverage of the medical care that they need. That's precisely why we are hard at work trying to pass health reform legislation that will improve access to quality and affordable health care for every American.

If enacted, America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009, currently H.R. 3200, will make dramatic improvements in our efforts to battle breast cancer. Specifically, it will provide affordable access to insurance. H.R. 3200 would prohibit insurers from excluding patients or charging higher premiums because of preexisting conditions. It would offer protection against high out-of-pocket costs by limiting deductibles and copayments and precluding insurance companies from establishing limits on annual or lifetime benefits. H.R. 3200 would also prohibit insurers from rescinding or dropping insurance policies on the basis of health status.

This bill would also provide coverage of preventive services in Medicare, Medicaid, and within the newly established Health Insurance Exchange, free of cost sharing. This means that services like mammograms would be available free of copays. Early detection and treatment can help reduce the number of patients who ever get to stage IV while we continue our efforts to find a cure for those who do.

I am pleased to join my colleagues today in raising awareness about breast cancer, and particularly stage IV breast cancer.

Of course I want to thank, in particular, the gentlewoman from Connecticut, Congresswoman DeLauro, and my colleague from New Jersey, Congressman LoBiondo, for their leadership.

Let me just say about Congresswoman DeLauro, she has been basically a champion on every aspect of breast cancer since I've been here. I think, really, without her efforts, we would not have gone as far as we have in terms of providing meaningful research and treatment. So it's certainly no surprise that she is the prime sponsor of this resolution today.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the sponsor of the legislation, the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro). I can't say enough about her. Her championing on the issues of breast cancer research, treatment, et cetera, are really always out there.

I yield the gentlewoman 1 additional minute.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman).

(Ms. HARMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

I yield to the gentlewoman 1 additional minute.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Berkley).

Mr. Speaker, I would just urge everyone to support this resolution. I particularly want to thank the survivors, Mrs. Myrick, Ms. DeLauro, and Ms. Wasserman Schultz.

They just spend so much time devoted to this issue, whether it's research, treatment, to try to find a cure or to just raise awareness. I never cease to be amazed by their efforts. I want to thank them and I urge everyone to pass the resolution.

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

Mr. President, today I introduce the Comprehensive Derivatives Regulation Act of 2009, or the CDRA, which establishes for the first time a comprehensive regulatory framework to prevent derivatives trading activities from ever again contributing to catastrophic failures in our financial system. One year ago this month our nation found itself on the verge of a total financial meltdown with decades-old financial institutions collapsing overnight and credit markets freezing up in large part because companies like AIG took huge and risky bets selling totally unregulated credit default swaps, bets that backfired when the housing bubble burst.

Derivatives are financial contracts that investors use to manage their risks or grow their portfolios. They are called derivatives because they derive their value from other things such as the price of corn at a future date, or whether a company fails to make good on its debts. While most derivatives offer companies the ability to better manage their risks, some irresponsible financial firms took huge risks in recent years using new, untested, and unregulated derivatives products. When these firms faltered, it sent shockwaves through our financial system and landed us in a recession. As a result, today families in Rhode Island and throughout the country struggle to keep their jobs and stay in their homes.

I have been working over the past year with my Senate colleagues to develop a series of critical reforms to the financial sector to ensure that we never face such a perilous situation again. As the Chairman of the Securities, Insurance, and Investment Subcommittee of the Senate Banking Committee, I have introduced bills to greatly strengthen oversight of credit rating agencies and hedge funds, which until now have been subject to relatively little regulation.

Introducing the CDRA is another key step in filling the huge regulatory gaps in our financial system. This bill would put in place a truly comprehensive framework for regulating all such products. Derivatives have been overseen by two market regulators, the Securities and Exchange Commission, SEC, which has broad responsibility for protecting investors and ensuring the integrity of securities markets, and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, CFTC, which regulates commodity futures and the exchanges on which those products are traded.

In part because of this shared jurisdiction, large segments of the derivatives markets, such as credit default swaps, have gone entirely unsupervised by either agency. This bill will fill these regulatory gaps.

First, the bill would require standardized credit default swaps and other unregulated derivatives to be traded through a clearinghouse. This would protect the companies and the financial system from the risks posed by these instruments. Importantly, the bill also grants regulators the ability to oversee any new derivative product in the future, so dealers can no longer create products that fall into holes in the law.

Second, the bill establishes robust capital and margin requirements for derivatives dealers and other major market participants, and subjects them to higher standards for products that are not traded on clearinghouses.

Third, the bill subjects firms to new conduct requirements to protect investors from abusive practices in the market. It also includes new recordkeeping and reporting requirements to ensure that regulators and investors have broad information about derivatives transactions and positions throughout the financial sector.

Fourth, the bill combats fraud and manipulation in derivatives markets by giving regulators new authority to set position limits and oversee the marketing of products to certain investors. The bill strengthens thresholds in place to ensure only sophisticated investors are engaging in certain types of trading.

Finally, the bill rationalizes the sharing of jurisdiction between the SEC and CFTC, and establishes a process for quickly assigning responsibility for new products so they do not fall through the cracks. Specifically, the bill provides the SEC with jurisdiction over all derivatives that are securities or can be used as synthetic substitutes for securities, because without such authority over products that can affect securities markets, the SEC cannot accomplish its mission to protect investors and ensure the integrity and fairness of markets. The bill provides the CFTC with jurisdiction over all other derivatives. The bill also provides a fast and efficient process for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to resolve any differences in views between the agencies that might arise.

I hope my colleagues will join me in improving the oversight of credit default swaps and other derivatives products by cosponsoring this legislation and supporting its passage.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 1694) to allow the funding for the interoperable emergency communications grant program established under the Digital Television Transition and Public Safety Act of 2005 to remain available until expended through fiscal year 2012, and for other purposes.

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

(Mr. BOUCHER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, before the House today is Senate 1694, a measure to enable funding for the Interoperable Emergency Communications Grant Program to remain available through fiscal year 2012. In the absence of this measure, the funds for the program could not be expended by the recipients of grants under the program after the end of this year.

The bill before the House has been approved in the other body, and it is identical to House bills previously introduced by the gentlelady from California (Ms. Harman) and by the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Cao). The bill extends the Public Safety Interoperable Communications Grant Program that is jointly administered by the U.S. Department of Commerce through the National Telecommunications and Information Administration and by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

The funds, which are awarded as grants to first responders under the program, derive from proceeds of the auction by the Federal Communications Commission of the 700 megahertz spectrum, which became available as TV broadcasters ceased their analog television broadcasts in association with the digital television transition. The program had its genesis in recommendations by the 9/11 Commission concerning the well-acknowledged shortcomings in interoperable communications capabilities among first responders nationwide.

As required by law, the Department of Commerce's Office of the Inspector General conducted an annual assessment of that Department's management of this grant program. It found that the NTIA within the Department of Commerce had met the statutory guidelines and requirements for making awards and for reviewing and approving the grantees' communications plans, but the Office of Inspector General also found that the congressional deadline which exists in current law had not allowed the States a sufficient amount of time within which by the end of this year to expend the grant funds that they receive under this program. That inability of States to expend all of these moneys by the end of this year is what necessitates the passage of the measure that is before us today.

Ms. Harman's measure was approved by the Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the Internet of our House Energy and Commerce Committee on the 8th of October, and her measure was approved by the full committee on October 15. It has been endorsed by, among others, the National Governors Association, the Major Cities Chiefs Association, the Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials--International, the Telecommunications Industry Association, the National Emergency Management Association, and mayors of the cities of New York, Houston, and Los Angeles. S. 1694 passed the other body by unanimous consent on October 14, and we're taking up the Senate measure today so that upon approval in the House, it can go directly to the President for signature without further delay.

I want to say thank you this morning to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns), who is the ranking Republican member of the Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the Internet, and also the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton), who is the ranking member on our full committee, for the bipartisan manner in which we have processed the legislation through the Energy and Commerce Committee. I commend both Ms. Harman and Mr. Cao for their leadership.

Mr. Speaker, with the conclusion of these comments, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I recognize myself for 2 minutes.

Let me again thank the gentleman from Louisiana and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman) for bringing this measure before us today. It is a bipartisan measure.

It is necessary that we pass this legislation in order to assure that first responders are able to expend the funds that are awarded to them under the Emergency Communications Grant Program. That program expires at the end of this year, and the Inspector General at the Department of Commerce found that awardees under that program simply within that timeframe do not have the time necessary in order to make good on these grants and expend those for communications equipment. So by extending this program until the end of fiscal year 2012, we provide the time that is necessary.

It is appropriate legislation, completely bipartisan, and I encourage that the House adopt this bill.

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

I thank the gentleman for the time, and I also want to say to him thank you for your very, very kind words. It has been my honor to work in partnership with Congressman Pallone. He is enormously committed to health care and to health care reform but with particular interest to women's health issues. He has been a strong partner in his championing of these efforts on the committee which he chairs.

I also want to say a ``thank you'' to my colleague Congressman LoBiondo for cosponsoring this resolution with me today and a particular ``thank you'' to my colleague and good friend, Congresswoman Myrick, for all of her efforts and stamina. We are a band of sisters in this effort. Thank you so very, very much.

Mr. Speaker, following the lead of eight States across the Nation-- Colorado, Georgia, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Washington, and my home State of Connecticut--this resolution expresses support for designating October 13, 2009, as National Metastatic Breast Cancer Awareness Day.

Right now in America, it has been said that 15,000 men and women around the country are living with metastatic, or stage IV, breast cancer. It means that the cancer cells have traveled from the breast to other areas in the body, such as to the liver, lungs, bones or brain, and the cells are now growing there. There is no cure for breast cancer once it has metastasized, and most of today's current medical treatments are focused only on extending the best quality of life for the patient.

Breast cancer is the second leading type of cancer among women. In this year alone, 192,000 women--over that number--and 1,900 men in the United States will be diagnosed with the disease, and over 62,000 women will die from it. Thirty percent of women diagnosed with earlier stages of the illness will eventually suffer from metastatic breast cancer. The later it is diagnosed, the more likely it is that the cancer has or will metastasize.

Missed opportunities of early detection is a major reason why women in developing countries, as well as right here in the United States with our own most vulnerable citizens, are more likely diagnosed with late-stage breast cancer. Without adequate access to preventative medical care, the health of the poor here and around the world is already at extreme risk.

For all of these reasons and more, we believe that Congress should support this resolution and should get behind National Metastatic Breast Cancer Awareness Day on October 13. Not only will such a day help to emphasize the urgent need for new and targeted breast cancer treatments for stage IV cancer patients, but it will raise awareness, and it will save lives.

I know firsthand. I'm a cancer survivor--ovarian cancer. I was fortunate enough to have been diagnosed at stage 1. If it had not been caught early by my doctor or if the cancer had metastasized, there is a good chance I would not be standing here today. We need to promote awareness of metastatic cancers in any way that we can so that women and men will know how to get timely mammograms and cancer screenings that might just save their lives.

Even as doctors and scientists search for a cure for metastatic breast cancer, it is up to us to help make the treatment affordable for women in need and to pass comprehensive health insurance reform now, not later. Too many women with breast cancer today are forced to make decisions based on their finances and not on what is best for their health. All too often, as they bravely battle their illnesses, they must also fight high out-of-pocket costs and denied claims. If they become too sick to work, they must face the terrifying prospect of losing their coverage altogether.

While today we express our support for a National Metastatic Breast Cancer Awareness Day, I hope very soon in the future we will reaffirm our commitment to breast cancer patients by passing meaningful health insurance reform.

Today's resolution has the support of several key organizations, including Living Beyond Breast Cancer, breastcancer.org, The Wellness Community, Breast Cancer Network of Strength--formerly Y- ME--and the Young Survivor Coalition.

By drawing attention to this disease, we can help medical researchers find ways to provide a higher quality of life and a longer life expectancy for patients. We can help make stage IV cancer a chronic but not a fatal disease, and we can encourage the women and men we love to stay aware of metastatic breast cancer and to protect themselves through regular checkups and screenings.

I strongly urge my colleagues to support this resolution.