Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1413.

H.R. 1413 was introduced by Representatives Lowey and Brown-Waite to establish a pilot program to test the viability of physically screening airport workers at seven (7) airports. I am pleased to report that this bipartisan bill, as amended in Committee, not only requires TSA to test physical screening but also alternative forms of screening, including: biometrics, behavior recognition, and canine teams.

Consideration of H.R. 1413 is timely in light of the October 2007 arrest of 10 airline employees for operating a drug smuggling ring at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York. The ring leader allegedly directed JFK airport employees from inside the airport on how to move heroin and cocaine into so-called ``safe areas'' of the airport.

Mr. Speaker, most people that work in our nation's airports are hardworking, trustworthy people who pose no threat to the traveling public. However, in a post-9/11 world, we have to address the risk of an ``inside job''--where an attack is planned and executed by an airport worker who exploits security gaps. H.R. 1413 does just that.

H.R. 1413 does so in a manner that strives to assure that that people that keep the planes flying are able to do their job. Specifically, H.R. 1413 creates a 180-day pilot program where all the people that access the terminal and the airplanes, not just the American Flying Public, are screened.

To those who think this can't be done, I'm here to tell you ``it can be done.'' They do it at London's Heathrow airport. They do it at DeGaulle Airport in Paris. I understand that there are those who don't want us to look at this approach. But in a post-9/11 world, failing to do so is just plain wrong.

Under the leadership of Subcommittee Chairwoman Jackson-Lee, H.R. 1413 was agreed to ``as amended,'' on April 24th by voice vote. The full committee considered, voted and reported favorably on August 1. I strongly urge passage of this bill that takes a reasonable approach to exploring how to better secure our airports, airplanes and travelers.

Mrs. Lowey and Ms. Brown-Waite are to be commended for their leadership on this critical legislation. I look forward to continuing to work with the bills sponsors and other interested parties to ensure that TSA structures the pilot in a manner that provides Congress with the best guidance on how to address this gap in security. I strongly urge passage on this important homeland security measure.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Safe and Healthy Emergency Housing Act, which underscores the Federal Government's obligation to provide safe emergency housing units to disaster victims during times of need.

I am glad to be joined today in introducing this bill by the chairman of the Subcommittee on Emergency Communications, Preparedness and Response, Henry Cuellar from Texas, and Representative Gene Taylor, who knows firsthand the importance of providing adequate housing to disaster victims.

I would also like to thank Representatives Clarke, Jackson Lee, Christensen, Lofgren, and Al Green for signing on as original cosponsors.

Nearly 2\1/2\ years after Hurricane Katrina, we are still learning how we can improve our ability to better prepare for, respond to, and recover from disasters. The lessons we have learned cannot be ignored.

One of the most striking lessons we learned was that this country was ill-prepared to provide emergency housing to victims during a major catastrophe.

To house the number of individuals who lost their homes during Katrina and Rita, FEMA was forced to immediately purchase thousands of travel trailers. By the time the dust settled, FEMA had purchased over 100,000 of these units.

At the time, travel trailers appeared to be a logical choice because they can be produced much faster than other housing alternatives. However, as time passed, it became clear that travel trailers may not have been the best option.

By now, most of us are well aware that many of the travel trailers provided by FEMA were and remain contaminated with formaldehyde. Many of us, however, do not know why this happened.

Tests conducted in 2006 found that the formaldehyde levels in most of the trailers tested exceeded the Environmental Protection Agency's recommended limit. It's also important to note that formaldehyde is classified as a carcinogen by the International Agency for Research of Cancer.

I have continually raised concerns over the health impacts of formaldehyde exposure with the Department of Homeland Security, FEMA, and the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, CDC.

My Committee staff has also interviewed medical officials from the CDC Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry about a February 2007 report that focused on formaldehyde levels present in FEMA trailers. However, the study did not analyze the potential health impacts on travel trailers' residents.

After expressing my deep concerns with the DHS chief medical officer over the lack of such a study, FEMA announced that they would be entering into an agreement with the CDC to test the trailers for formaldehyde and to study what associated health impacts may have been encountered.

I anxiously await the results of this important study.

Madam Speaker, as you may know, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, HUD, regulates formaldehyde emissions in manufactured housing. However, travel trailers are not considered to be ``manufactured housing,'' and are, therefore, exempt from this regulation.

This legislation protects disaster victims by requiring that any emergency housing units provided by FEMA meet HUD regulations limiting formaldehyde emissions.

This legislation does not force the travel trailer industry to change the way they manufacture their product, it simply makes certain that FEMA will no longer provide formaldehyde-contaminated housing units to disaster victims.

While the health implications are still being studied, we do know that research has proven that the negative health effects can range anywhere from respiratory irritation to cancer. According to medical experts, the health impacts are most concerning for children whose lungs are still developing.

In closing Madam Speaker, let me say that our citizens' health should be a top priority

during times of disaster recovery. I believe this legislation will embrace that priority and make certain that this problem will not be encountered during future disasters.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3247, the Hurricanes Katrina and Rita Recovery Facilitation Act of 2007. This bill directs the President to increase to 90 percent the amount of Federal contributions for replacing any State or local government property damaged by the hurricanes. Enactment of this bill is critical if we are going to finally rebuild the historic and vital infrastructure in Mississippi and Louisiana.

This bill also addresses a variety of other issues of importance toward rebuilding communities in Mississippi and Louisiana including temporary housing for volunteers, debris removal program eligibility for Mississippi and Louisiana, providing for respectful care and interment of human remains damaged during the hurricanes, restoring certain public facilities and providing incentives for certain hazard mitigation projects. All of these are important steps toward rebuilding our vibrant Gulf Coast communities.

Madam Speaker, this bill is welcomed, as both Louisiana and Mississippi are still rebuilding from the damages caused by the storms. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported in August that some communities are still without basic needs--such as schools, hospitals, and other infrastructure. In addition to these basic community needs, many are still without jobs because the doors of many businesses remain closed. Estimates from the Congressional Budget Office put, capital losses resulting from both hurricanes in the range of $70 to $130 billion. The GAO report further found that a substantial portion of the billions of dollars in assistance to the Gulf Coast was directed to short-term needs, leaving a smaller portion for long-term rebuilding. To date, the Federal government has provided most long-term rebuilding assistance to the Gulf Coast states through two key programs: FEMA's Public Assistance Program and the Department of Housing and Urban Development's Community Development Block Grant program (CDBG). Both States allocated a bulk of their CDBG funds to homeowner assistance, thus, creating a need for supplemental public assistance funds to focus on rebuilding and restoring critical infrastructure, such as government facilities, which funding this bill provides.

The increased assistance from the Federal government to Louisiana and Mississippi to rebuild their infrastructure through FEMA's public assistance program will help with the financial burden they face and will allow the process, which has thus far been daunting, to proceed more rapidly. This legislation is a step forward because it increases Federal assistance toward the rebuilding process and provides needed changes to the Stafford Act.

And, as we focus on rebuilding infrastructure in Louisiana and Mississippi, we must not forget that many of the child care facilities were damaged and even destroyed, while parents struggled to find a safe place to leave

their children while regrouping. Many child care facility owners are still waiting to hear from FEMA about financial assistance. Because I recognize the importance of emergency child care after a disaster, I introduced H.R. 2479, the Emergency Child Care Services Act, which was referred to the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. This bill would amend the Stafford Act to designate emergency child care as a ``critical service'' that is eligible to receive disaster assistance from FEMA. Recently, I have received calls from colleagues who represent areas affected by the California wildfires, inquiring about the bill's status. I am disappointed that the Emergency Child Care bill was not included in the bill debated on the floor today. It is my hope that my bill will be successfully passed out of Committee in the near future.

As Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee with oversight of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), of which FEMA is a part, our Committee works diligently to ensure that DHS and all of its components are prepared to respond to acts of terrorism, natural disasters and other emergencies. This bill will help rebuild our communities in both Louisiana and Mississippi and help with preparedness efforts for future incidents.

In closing, let me thank my colleagues on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee for their leadership on this legislation, and in particular, Ms. Norton, who is also a member of the Committee on Homeland Security, for spearheading this effort. I look forward to working with Chairman Oberstar, Ms. Norton and others on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee to assure that our Federal disaster and post-terrorism response capabilities are at the level that the American people deserve. I encourage my colleagues to support this legislation.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce legislation designating the United States Post Office located at 100 W. Percy Street in Indianola, MS, as the ``Minnie Cox United States Post Office''.

Minnie M. Geddings Cox, a graduate of Fisk University, was appointed postmistress of

Indianola, MS, in 1891, by President Benjamin Harrison, and was reappointed by President William McKinley; thereby, becoming the first Black postmistress of the United States.

On January 25, 1900, President McKinley raised the rank of the Indianola Post Office from fourth class to third class and appointed Mrs. Cox for a full 4-year term. However, in the fall of 1902, under the presidency of Theodore Roosevelt, a controversy brought national attention to Mrs. Cox. Jim Crow laws overran Reconstruction in America and whites wanted blacks eliminated from leadership positions. Some of the local whites in Indianola met and drew up a petition requesting Cox's resignation. Increased tension and threats of physical harm caused Cox to submit her resignation to take effect January 1, 1903, and leave Indianola.

President Roosevelt believed Mrs. Cox had been wronged, and that the authority of the Federal Government was being compromised and refused to accept her resignation. Instead, he closed Indianola's post office on January 2, 1903, rerouted the mail to Greenville, MS, 30 miles away and Cox continued to receive her salary. For 4 hours in January 1903, the Indianola postal event was debated on the floor of the United States Senate, and appeared on the front pages of newspapers across the country. One year later, at the expiration of Mrs. Cox's term, in February 1904, the post office was reopened, but demoted in rank from third class to fourth class.

Minnie Cox and her husband Wayne W. Cox, who had been an employee in the railway mail service, returned to Indianola and organized the ``Delta Penny Savings Bank.'' They had been substantial property owners before 1903, and they bought more land and became successful bankers as well. Minnie Cox died in 1933.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3867, the Small Business Contracting Program Improvements Act.

I want to thank Chairwoman Velazquez for introducing this important legislation, and for all of her hard work in getting it to the floor today.

This bill is important to all Americans, because small business keeps this country working.

The Federal Government has numerous programs to assist America's small businesses, but problems remain, and H.R. 3867 addresses several of them.

In particular, I support the bill's efforts to crack down on large firms that masquerade as small businesses.

In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, we learned about a particular multinational corporation that listed itself as a small business and gained disaster recovery contracts set aside for small businesses.

When we checked further, we found that this firm had 17 divisions and had generated $4.5 billion in revenue in its North American operation alone.

That surely doesn't look like any small business I've ever seen.

Morever, we learned that this was not the first time that this multinational company had been awarded contracts that were set aside for small businesses.

In fact, another government agency had given them an award for outstanding ``small business performance''.

H.R. 3867 creates penalties for companies that misrepresent themselves as being owned by ``a service-disabled veteran.''

This is a good first step at cracking down on companies that misrepresent themselves to improperly gain government contracts.

At the same time, the Small Business Administration needs to step up and do more.

SBA must full its responsibility to enforce the laws and allow small businesses the opportunities that Congress has said they should have.

Until the laws we pass are truly enforced, small business will never be able to fulfill their economic promise.

I urge my colleagues to support it.

Madam Speaker, I move to lay the resolution on the table.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1955) to prevent homegrown terrorism, and for other purposes, as amended.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on this bill and include therein any extraneous material.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1955, the Violent Radicalization of Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007.

In May, six men were arrested for allegedly plotting to attack Fort Dix. Three of those men were United States citizens; the other three had been in the United States since they were small children. Then, again, in June, another four men were charged with plotting to attack JFK Airport by blowing up jet fuel tanks. The alleged mastermind of this plot was a United States citizen.

Today, one of the most frequently visited English language Web sites that preaches hate, violence and radicalized views of Islam is operated by a 21-year-old U.S. citizen from the comfort of his parents' home in North Carolina. Some may say these incidents are isolated cases, but I believe that they are indicative of a growing trend of homegrown terrorism in this country.

Homegrown terrorists no longer need to travel to Afghanistan or Pakistan to get support and training. They can simply go on the Internet to find violent propaganda and others who share their violent ideology. H.R. 1955 provides us with a strategy for how to address this very challenging Homeland Security issue. I commend Chairwoman Harman for authoring this important legislation and for championing this case.

The centerpiece of this bill is the creation of a national commission. It is a step in the right direction. National commissions have a long and successful history in this country. The Gilmore Commission, of which our chairwoman was a member, which functioned from 1993 to 1998, made 164 recommendations regarding the domestic response to terrorism. Of those 164 recommendations, all have been adopted in whole or in part by the Congress and the Federal Government.

Another commission, the National Commission on Terrorism, which operated in the early 1990s, was on the cutting edge of the terrorism debate. That commission provided the Nation with the blueprint of how to address the threat of terrorism long before the September 11 attacks.

The more recent 9/11 Commission set the tenor of our administrative and legislative response to the September 11 attack. That commission's recommendations were the bedrock of legislation I offered that was enacted into law this summer.

The commission established in H.R. 1955 will help build on the work of past commissions and help our Nation come up with strategies for new threats. The bill also requires our government to reach out to other nations that have experienced home grown terrorism. Learning from other nations about what works and what doesn't will better position us to prevent the spread of violent ideology in our country.

The bill also creates a center of excellence to conduct research that is desperately needed in determining the root cause of violent radicalization.

At the same time, H.R. 1955 also protects simple rights and liberties of U.S. citizens. The bill is mindful of Americans' right to free speech, freedom of association and freedom to worship. H.R. 1955 makes certain that individuals exercising these rights within lawful parameters are not singled out.

I urge my colleagues to support this important Homeland Security bill and ask them to vote in favor of passage of this important legislation.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield as much time as she may consume to the gentlelady from California (Ms. Harman), the chairman of the subcommittee, as well as the author of this legislation under consideration today.

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Carney), the chairman of our Management and Oversight Committee.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Perlmutter).

Madam Speaker, at this time I have no further requests for time, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, at this time I would

like to yield such time as she may consume to the chairman of the subcommittee, Ms. Harman.

Madam Speaker, in closing, I urge my colleagues to join me in support of H.R. 1955. This vital legislation will put our Nation on the path to addressing an emerging threat, homegrown terrorism.

There is general agreement that the threat of foreign-based terrorist groups is real. We, as a Nation, have dedicated a great deal of resources to global counterterrorism. However, in some corners, there has been a kind of mindset about homeland security that believes we will be safe if we get the terrorists there before they get us here. It's the kind of mindset that ignores the fact that there are some would-be terrorists who are born here, raised and educated here, and only have lived here in the United States. For those of us who love this Nation, it is not the kind of thing that we want to acknowledge, but we must. Enactment of H.R. 1955 will put us on a course to understanding homegrown terrorism and coming up with strategies to reduce this major threat to the homeland.

Madam Speaker, I, also would like to pay tribute to the chairwoman of the committee for ushering this passage, as well as the ranking member of the committee. But I would also like to acknowledge that Ranking Member King, who had an unfortunate death in his family, is not here. He has been a source of support for this legislation and has helped get us to this point, and I would like to acknowledge that for the record.

Madam Speaker, I urge passage of this legislation.

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

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

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1680) to authorize the Secretary of Homeland Security to regulate the sale of ammonium nitrate to prevent and deter the acquisition of ammonium nitrate by terrorists, as amended.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on this bill and include therein any extraneous material.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1680, the Secure Handling of Ammonium Nitrate Act of 2007.

The committee has worked vigilantly to get this bill to where it is today. In fact, we've been working on this bill in a bipartisan way for two Congresses now.

We all know the devastating impact that fertilizer bombs can have. Over 12 years ago, domestic terrorists used an ammonium nitrate-based bomb to blow up the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. That blast had a force equal to that of 4,000 pounds of TNT. It killed 168 people.

Since that time, ammonium nitrate-based bombs have repeatedly been used throughout the world. In 2002, a group linked to al Qaeda detonated a bomb outside a night club in Bali, Indonesia, killing 202 people. In 2003, an al Qaeda cell in Istanbul killed 57 people in two separate explosions. Last year, Canadian authorities arrested 17 people in Toronto for plotting to attack targets with ammonium nitrate-based bombs.

This threat is real, Madam Speaker. To do nothing about it is unacceptable. However, I have always believed that we must act in a thoughtful manner that recognizes the importance of ammonium nitrate in our agricultural sector.

I am proud of the work that the Committee on Homeland Security has done. The committee has worked hard to ensure that H.R. 1680 strikes the right balance between ensuring access to ammonium nitrate for farmers and making it difficult for terrorists to obtain.

Specifically, this bill directs DHS, in consultation with State agricultural authorities, to create a registry of facilities that manufacture and sell ammonium nitrate. H.R. 1680 requires the sales of ammonium nitrate to be limited to purchasers who register in advance and that the name, address, telephone number and registration number of the purchaser be recorded.

The tracking and registration functions are not new phenomena. The agriculture and fertilizer industry and some States have been engaged in voluntary programs to monitor sale of ammonium nitrate for some time. In fact, Madam Speaker, a handful of States, including New York, California, New Jersey, Nevada, Oklahoma, Missouri, South Carolina, Maryland, Michigan, and Iowa have enacted laws regulating the sale of ammonium nitrate-based fertilizer.

The time has come to put Federal rules in place to ensure that terrorists cannot cross State lines to buy ammonium nitrate without being registered or checked against the terrorist watch list.

Madam Speaker, I am proud to say that our committee has worked collaboratively with industry stakeholders in the agriculture industry on this legislation. We consulted State and local farm bureaus, fertilizer manufacturers and retail outlets, and mining and explosive makers. It is reassuring to know that we can all come together to come up with a reasonable approach to regulating ammonium nitrate.

I have somewhat of a vested interest in getting this right, Madam Speaker. There is an ammonium nitrate plant in my district. The Terra Yazoo City plant has been in operation for more than 50 years. The Terra plant is a major economic engine in our local economy, providing good-paying jobs and stable jobs for the community.

The Terra facility and many others like it across the country are committed to safeguarding ammonium nitrate, but they cannot do it alone. The Federal Government needs to show some leadership here. That is why H.R. 1680 directs DHS to take the lead in coming up with an approach to registering ammonium nitrate purchases.

I am pleased that through this bipartisan effort we've been able to come up with an approach to tighten control of ammonium nitrate, yet allow it to remain accessible for crop nutrition purposes.

This legislation is another of our ongoing homeland security efforts at preventing a future terrorist attack on our Nation.

I would like to thank subcommittee Chairman Langevin, Ranking Member King, and others, for their leadership on this critical issue. Each has put their mark on the bill through the committee process. Their efforts, without question, made this a better bill.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 1680.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Perlmutter), a distinguished member of our committee.

Mr. Speaker, at this time, I do not have any additional requests for speakers, and I am prepared to close.

Mr. Speaker, as DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff recently said, improvised explosive devices are the weapon of choice for terrorists. And when it comes to making an improvised bomb, regrettably, ammonium nitrate seems to be an easy access to use. That is why I authored the Secure Handling of Ammonium Nitrate Act. It will put safeguards in place to keep ammonium nitrate out of the hands of terrorists while ensuring that farmers can still access it. Ammonium nitrate fertilizer is a popular fertilizer because it is relatively inexpensive and highly effective.

In 2005 alone, 1.4 million short tons of ammonium nitrate fertilizer was used to direct application to farmers' fields. Passage of H.R. 1680 will ensure that ammonium nitrate will remain available to those who need to access it for proper purposes. At the same time, passage of this bill is an important step toward ensuring that our Nation is more secure against the threat of improvised explosive devices.

I, too, would like to acknowledge the work of the minority committee as well as Colleen O'Keefe, who will be leaving the committee today. Karis Gutter on this side, has worked on the majority side on the committee, and I would like to acknowledge both of them. At an earlier comment, I referred to Ranking Member King's unfortunate tragedy in his family and why he was not here. So I would like to join with the comments of Mr. Lungren in that respect.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in passing this critical homeland security legislation.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to express my strong opposition to the nomination of Leslie Southwick, now being considered by the U.S. Senate.

In an attempt, yet again, to place someone for a lifetime seat on the Federal bench, which has traditionally been racially ignorant and insensitive towards civil rights, the President has risen to the occasion and nominated Leslie Southwick.

This will be his third nomination, of a Mississippian, to the Fifth Circuit since 2001. However, none of his nominations aid in rectifying the egregious problem with the lack of diversity on Mississippi's Federal bench.

Mississippi has the highest African-American population, 37 percent, of any state in the country. In spite of the hundreds of African- American lawyers and judges in Mississippi, there has never been an African-American, nor any other minority from Mississippi, appointed to represent Mississippi on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in the history of this country.

This is a fight worth having. The Fifth Circuit has the highest percentage of minority residents of any circuit. At the same time, its civil rights jurisprudence is far to the right. The recent events in Jena, LA, show the racism in the criminal justice system within the jurisdiction of the Fifth Circuit. We cannot afford a nominee hostile to civil rights on this or any other Court.

There is a history with this seat. The President is intent on placing someone hostile to civil rights in the Mississippi seat on this Court. Charles Pickering and Michael Wallace were nominated but couldn't get confirmed because of their civil rights records. This is the third try by the Administration, and the pattern is very clear.

Instead of stepping up to the plate and nominating someone capable of delivering fair and impartial decisions on civil rights, the President has slapped Mississippians in the face with the recent nomination of Southwick. Just look to Southwick's controversial opinions.

In Richmond v. MS Dep't of Human Services, a white employee was fired for using the phrase ``good ole nigger'' toward an African-American co- worker. When the white employee was fired, a hearing officer reinstated the employee. In upholding the reinstatement, the majority (which Southwick joined) concluded that using the phrase ``good ole nigger'' was equivalent to calling the other employee her ``teacher's pet.'' This opinion was unanimously reversed by the Mississippi Supreme Court. And this is Bush's No. 1 draft pick?

Southwick's rulings on race discrimination in jury selections are equally disturbing. In such cases there is a noticeable pattern of prejudice. Southwick upheld claims that the defense struck white jurors on the basis of their race while rejecting claims that the prosecution was racially motivated in striking African-American jurors. On one hand, Southwick allows prosecutors to strike African-American jurors when the motivation is clearly racial, McWilliams v. Mississippi, or when the prosecution cites non-racial reasons for the strikes, Davis v. Mississippi. Yet, Southwick denies the defenses warranted attempts to strike white jurors even when the defense uses the same non-racial reasons for the strikes, Webb v. Mississippi. And this is the President's No. 1 draft pick?

The aforementioned cases exemplify several opportunities Southwick has had to make a judicious decision befitting such a high court but failed to do so.

Such views must not be tolerated or encouraged through a nomination to a lifelong post representing the judicial integrity of our nation. By this nomination, the Administration is attempting to reward judicious incompetence and great shortsightedness toward civil rights issues.

It's almost as if the President believes that Mississippi does not have any competent African-American lawyers. To think that a state overflowing with highly capable African-American attorneys cannot fill this Mississippi seat is simply preposterous.

Again, I express my sincere opposition to the nomination of Leslie Southwick to Mississippi's Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Mississippi needs a nominee who will not look to discourage or impede its growth, but instead, support and empower Mississippi's legacy.

Thank you very much.

Mr. Speaker, I join members of the Congressional Black Caucus, who have unanimously opposed the nomination of Leslie Southwick to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

For the record, Mr. Speaker, the Fifth Circuit is composed of Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas. This circuit historically was one of those circuits that moved civil rights and voting rights issues in a manner that allowed all people representation. So what we've seen under the President's administration, we've seen this court move in the opposite direction.

As a resident of Mississippi and a representative for the Second Congressional District, we have yet to have a member of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals who is an African American. We have the highest population of any circuit in the State in the circuit; yet we are completely void of representation.

I don't have to go through the litany of problems we've had in Mississippi with respect to civil rights. As you know, and as so many know, Mr. Speaker, had it not been for the Federal court system, many of us would not be in elected office. Many of us would not hold positions of higher responsibility because our State denied African Americans, for a number of years, equal representation under law and denied that representation because of color.

And so what we have in the Southwick nomination, Mr. Speaker, is a continuing pattern of nominating people who have demonstrated racial insensitivity toward people of color. In the Richmond v. Mississippi Department of Human Services, a white employee was fired for using the phrase ``good ole nigger'' toward an African American coworker. When the white employee was fired, a hearing officer reinstated the employee.

In upholding the reinstatement, the majority, Mr. Speaker, which Judge Southwick joined, concluded that using the phrase ``good ole nigger'' was equivalent to calling the other employee her ``teacher's pet''. This opinion, I'm happy to say, Mr. Speaker, was unanimously reversed by the Mississippi Supreme Court. And this is our President's number one nominee for the Fifth Circuit, who says that it's all right to use the ``N'' word when referring to people of color because it's equivalent to being called the ``teacher's pet,'' or as he said in later words, ``a term of endearment.'' That's an insult. But it goes to the crux of the issue of whether or not the temperament of this gentleman, Leslie Southwick, fits promotion to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

In addition to that, on another case, McWilliams v. Mississippi, when a prosecutor cites nonracial readiness for strikes. Davis v. Mississippi is another case. Judge Southwick denied the defense's warranted attempts to strike white jurors, even when the defense used the same nonracial reasons for strikes. Webb v. Mississippi. In other words, it's all right to strike black people from juries for nonracial reasons, but you can't strike white people from juries for nonracial reasons.

So, Mr. Speaker, we have a problem. This is the person under consideration this week by the United States Senate. I'm happy to say that the Congressional Black Caucus has taken up a number of issues this session, but the Southwick nomination really goes to the heart of why we are all here. We cannot put people on the bench for a lifetime job who demonstrate this kind of insensitivity.

So, Mr. Speaker, I am happy to join my colleagues with the Congressional Black Caucus in unanimously opposing the elevation of Judge Southwick to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. His nomination is not just an affront to people of color, but it is an affront to people of good will. That someone who demonstrated a lack of judicial temperament can actually be nominated and be given serious consideration by the United States Senate is beyond me.

But, again, I want to express my sincere opposition to the nomination of Leslie Southwick to the Mississippi Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Mississippi needs a nominee who will not look to discourage or impede its growth, but instead support and empower Mississippi's legacy. I appreciate my colleague from Ohio yielding me the time.

That's correct.

Well, the record will reflect, Mrs. Tubbs Jones, that at that hearing significant evidence was introduced as to the statistical probability of African Americans being nominated to the court. It was also introduced that the population of African Americans was the greatest in the State of Mississippi, that Mississippi had fewer individuals on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and has never had an African American on a court in its entire history from the State of Mississippi. So this is a golden opportunity, it was a golden opportunity for President Bush to do the right thing. But this was his third nominee for this one judgeship. Each of

the other individuals who he has nominated also had that judicial temperament and their qualifications questioned to the point that they were denied.

So what we have here is a third bite at an apple that really deserves reconsideration by the President. But since he did not choose to do so, I am committed, like the other members of the Congressional Black Caucus, to make our voices heard this week on the floor of the United States Senate with its colleagues there to say that this is not the America that we all want to be known for.

And so that issue, Mrs. Tubbs Jones, was thoroughly aired. I am disappointed that a letter from Judge Southwick swayed one member of the Judiciary Committee to change their vote. You know, we can all write letters. But in the record, we have opposing views from the Magnolia Bar, which is the African American Bar Association in the State of Mississippi, the Mississippi NAACP, a whole host of elected officials and others saying that this is not in the best interests going forth with this nomination.

So we believe that the record was complete and that a thorough airing of what is before that Judiciary Committee would have basically provided significant opposition to Judge Southwick. But, you know, this is politics. That letter changed the position of one member on the judiciary who did not talk to anybody from Mississippi, did not talk to anybody from California, did not talk to anybody who had an interest diametrically opposed to the person under consideration. They took a letter, read it into the Record, and made a decision as to a person saying, I will do better now that I understand that it is not proper to use the N word or that it is not proper to deny African Americans positions on juries just because they happen to be black.

Well, that is not enough in my book, nor the Congressional Black Caucus's book, to warrant a person being elevated to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Now, the reason I say that, to be honest with you, is that the majority of the voting rights and civil rights legislation that comes before the court generally comes from that circuit. So if you have someone who demonstrates time and time again that they lack the temperament, that they lack the judicial restraint to deal with cases relating to people of color, then that person should not be promoted to that position for which they are not made. So for that reason, I am happy to be here on behalf of those Members who serve the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in the United States House of Representatives.

We have, as you know, gone on record many times in writing opposing the nomination. We reiterated that opposition today in a letter when we found out that it would be considered sometime this week. So there is no question that people who represent individuals, more than 700,000 American citizens, in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals district are in opposition to it. And how one can take a letter from the person that is nominated and say that that one letter rises above those hundreds of thousands of people who have sent individuals to represent them here in Washington gets beyond me. But, again, we will continue to press the case. As you know, we are prepared to speak to the leadership before the issue is considered and do other things, because this is too big an issue for us not to give it our maximum effort.

Thank you very much.

Under clause 2 of rule XII, bills and reports were delivered to the Clerk for printing, and bills referred as follows:

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi: Committee on Homeland

Security. H.R. 2830. A bill to authorize appropriations for

the Coast Guard for fiscal year 2008, and for other purposes;

with an amendment; referred to the Committees on Energy and

Commerce, and Judiciary for a period ending not later than

October 15, 2007, for consideration of such provisions of the

bill and amendment as fall within the jurisdiction of those

committees pursuant to clauses 1(f) and 1(k), rule X (Rept.

110-338, Pt. 2). Ordered to be printed.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 2761, the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA) Revision and Extension, as Chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security. This bill necessarily reauthorizes TRIA for 15 years--through 2022. At its essence, TRIA provides a Federal backstop to the insurance industry by providing compensation for a portion of insured losses resulting from acts certified by the Federal government as acts of terrorism. Importantly, TRIA has no cost to the taxpayer unless there is a terrorist attack. This program is not an ongoing subsidy to the insurance industry but, instead, an incident-based program that will help to ensure the continuity of our livelihoods and commerce in the wake of a terrorist incident in the United States.

Mr. Chairman, history has shown that Al Qaeda and other extremist organizations will explicitly direct acts of terror against American citizens and property in an effort to inflict economic harm upon this country. The Congressional Research Service estimated that insured losses from the attacks on the World Trade Center total around $32 billion. This bill helps build resiliency in our country to respond to the known objectives of our adversaries.

As the Committee with oversight of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), our Committee works diligently to ensure that DHS

effectively executes and manages its duties. Since its inception, there has been an understandable focus on the protection of the United States against acts of terror. However, as demonstrated in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, I do not believe that there has been an adequate focus on recovering from the aftermath of a catastrophic incident by the Department. I believe that the extension of TRIA demonstrates our nation's necessary commitment to planning for the recovery and resumption of economic activity following an act of terrorism. Whereas we can never take our eyes off of protection and prevention, we must show a commitment to resiliency in the wake of an incident. This bill will help our nation begin its climb back to normality should we ever again be struck on our shores by terrorists.

Furthermore, the revision and extension of TRIA represents a vital element of homeland security, particularly in its protection of critical infrastructure: the effective cooperation between the public and private sectors. The Committee on Homeland Security has focused extensively on this necessary partnership and the homeland security solutions that can be achieved by both sectors working together. This necessary partnership will be essential to the successful stabilization of the United States economy at a time of national crisis, should one occur.

Last year, I expressed my concern with the TRIA not requiring insurers to offer coverage from acts of nuclear, biological, chemical, and radiological (NBCR) terrorism. Studies by numerous entities concluded that the risk of NBCR terrorism is essentially uninsurable unless there is a Federal government backstop. I am pleased that this legislation includes acts of NBCR terrorism in TRIA and, therefore, provides that federal backstop. This provision will hopefully encourage efforts by the insurance industry while providing it with the necessary support that it needs.

I am pleased that the bill incorporates the Secretary of DHS, especially relating to the certification of NBCR terrorism. It says that where a certified act of terrorism is carried out by means of an NBCR weapon or instrumentality, the Secretary of the Treasury will certify that act as an act of NBCR terrorism. Importantly, if a certified act of terrorism involves any other ``weapon or instrumentality,'' then the Secretary of the Treasury will consult with the Secretary of Homeland Security, among other officials, to determine whether the act of terrorism meets the definition of NBCR terrorism, as defined by the bill. This language recognizes the ever-changing threat we face as well as the expertise and sophistication of DHS.

It is important that this extension of TRIA will be for 15 years. This long-term extension will enhance economic stability--for example, by bringing more stability to the real estate and construction industries so that they can move forward with large-scale building projects in areas considered at high risk for terrorism. After all, TRIA was enacted in 2002 in an attempt to stabilize the economy that was badly disrupted by the events of 9/11 and to spur commercial development, as well as to prevent an industry-wide catastrophe in the event of another terrorist attack. This 15-year extension will create the predictability and confidence that the private sector needs to make investments that help our national economy.

This legislation will help our country and its industry spur economic development and, importantly, will provide the necessary economic security in the aftermath of a terrorist event to get our country moving as quickly as possible.

In closing, let me thank my colleagues on the Financial Services Committee for their leadership on this legislation, especially my colleagues Chairman Frank as well as Representative Carolyn Maloney of New York.

I encourage my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. Speaker while I commend the work on H.R. 1, I rise today to express my disappointment that the provision to afford our Transportation Security Officers (TSOs) the collective bargaining rights and whistleblower protections they deserve is excluded from the Conference Report. Mr. Speaker, our TSOs are not second class citizens and should not be treated as such.

In 2001, when the Transportation Safety Administration (TSA) was created, Congress vested power to set TSO compensation, leave, and other basic employment rights with the Secretary of Transportation. When TSA was moved to the Department of Homeland Security, this authority remained. While this authority was helpful in getting TSA up and running, the TSOs now need to be treated like all other TSA employees--fairly and equitably. This provision would have restored the labor rights of approximately 43,000 TSOs and provide them with veterans' preference, anti-discrimination protections, retirement, whistle-blowing, and collective-bargaining rights.

Restoring basic employment rights is critical to recruiting and retaining TSOs. We do not need to look far to see what low morale can do to the health, recruitment, and retention of the Department of Homeland Security workforce. According to a GAO report released this month, TSOs account for approximately a third of the total workforce and their attrition rates are higher than normal for the federal government. It is unfortunate that we are failing to provide the most basic labor protections to our front line workers who perform an important job and work to keep us all safe; rights that are afforded to thousands of workers in the federal government.

I commit to my colleagues today that as Chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security I will continue to work to ensure that our TSOs are afforded the rights and protections they deserve.

Additionally, the following individuals did a service to our nation in helping the Conference develop legislation to make America more secure: Michael Stroud, Denise Krepp, Veronique Pluviose-Fenton, Alison Rosso, Jacob Olcott, Chris Beck, Matt Washington, Jeff Greene, Erin Murphy, Michael Beland, Erin Daste, Tamla Scott, Tyrik McKeiver, Stephan Vina, Diane Bean, Brian Turbyfill, and Angela Rye.

Lastly, I would like to acknowledge that a lot of staff work went into getting us here today, and I would like to especially thank: My staff director, Jessica Herrera-Flanigan; and my chief counsel, Rosaline Cohen, as well as her predecessor, Todd Gee.

I don't mean to brag but I believe I have the best and most diverse professional staff on the Hill. A few of them are here with me on the floor. I also would like to acknowledge: the Committee's very able clerk, Michael Twinchek; Ranking Member King's staff--most especially Rob O'Connor and Michael Power; the folks at Legislative Counsel that brought it all together--Hank Savage and Hadley Ross; Mike Sheehy and Jerry Hartz with the Speaker's office; and Rob Cogorno and Mariah Sixkiller with the Leader.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Kingston amendment.

I understand the arguments in favor of importation, but I don't believe that the remedy to solve these problems is to open up our Nation's pharmaceutical supply and distribution system to potentially counterfeit drugs.

Now is simply not the time to open U.S. borders to counterfeit prescription medicines. A new report by the Center for Medicines in the Public Interest scheduled to be released September 30, 2007, projects counterfeit drug sales to reach $75 billion in 2010, a shocking 92 percent increase from 2005.

According to Peter Pitts, senior fellow for health care studies at the Pacific Research Institute and Director of the Center for Medicines in the Public Interest, ``The business of selling fake prescription drugs to unsuspecting consumers is burgeoning, and is a global industry. This underground industry represents a major public health risk for citizens of the world.''

The new report estimates counterfeit drug sales will grow 13 percent annually through 2010, compared to just 7.5 percent estimated annual growth for global pharmaceutical commerce.

This amendment is a first step towards opening wide the doors at our borders to drug imports--and thus to counterfeit and adulterated medicines that will jeopardize Americans' health and safety.

We should not compromise the public's faith in the quality and safety of our Nation's pharmaceuticals by opening our borders, dramatically increasing the availability of counterfeit medicines.

Mr. Chairman, I urge strong support for this motion.

Madam Speaker, I stand in support of H.R. 2722 because I recognize the importance of the Integrated Deepwater Systems (Deepwater) program to our National security.

We need to replace our aging ships and aircraft that operate offshore to protect our borders. While this program has come under much scrutiny for being more expensive than previously thought and taking more time to complete, it is still a worthwhile endeavor.

Everyday, valiant members of the U.S. Coast Guard risk their lives to rescue and protect Americans. The continued success of this mission is dependent upon Coast Guard assets which are aging by the day. In the mid-1990s, the Coast Guard decided to replace all of these assets in a single procurement program--the Integrated Deepwater System program, typically referred to as Deepwater. The Coast Guard's plan was to set forth broad mission requirements and then rely on private contractors to determine the mix of assets necessary to carry out those missions. Ultimately, the contract went to ``Integrated Coast Guard System'' (ICGS), a consortium headed by Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman.

Deepwater was intended to replace or modernize the approximately 90 ships and 200 Coast Guard aircraft used for missions taking place more than 50 miles offshore. The primary missions carried out in this ``deepwater'' zone are drug and migrant interdiction operations, search and rescue, homeland security, and fisheries law enforcement. Unfortunately, this program has been beset with problems. One part of the ICGS's Deepwater plan was to lengthen the Coast Guard's existing 110 foot patrol boats by 113 feet. Shortly after the first extended boat was delivered, cracks were found in its hull. The Coast Guard dry- docked the boats in December 2006 due to the lack of operational capacity in heavy seas. On February 14, 2007, the Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General released a report concerning whistleblower allegations made against the 123-foot Coast Guard cutter program. The report found that aspects of the C4ISR (Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance) equipment installed aboard the 123- foot cutters do not meet the design standards set forth in the Deepwater contract.

Specifically, the contractor did not install low smoke cabling aboard the 123-foot cutter, despite a Deepwater contract requirement. The intent of this requirement was to eliminate the polyvinyl chloride jacket encasing the cables, which for years produced toxic fumes and dense smoke during shipboard fire.

Additionally, the contractor installed C4ISR topside equipment aboard both the 123-foot cutters and prosecutors, which either did not comply or was not tested to ensure compliance with specific environmental performance requirements outlined in the Deepwater contract. On April 17, 2007, the Commandant of the Coast Guard announced the decommissioning of the entire 123-foot fleet.

Similarly, there are problems with the National Security Cutter. On January 23, 2007, the Department of Homeland Security Inspector General's Office released a report stating that ``the National Security Cutter, as designed and constructed, would not meet the performance specifications described in the original Deepwater contract.'' The report also states that ``The National Security Cutter's design and performance deficiencies are fundamentally the result of the Coast Guard's failure to exercise technical oversight over the design and construction of its Deepwater assets.''

Furthermore, the Inspector General's Office found that ``since the deepwater contract was signed in June 2002, the combined cost of National Security Cutters 1 and 2 has increased from $517 million to approximately $775 million.'' The $775 estimate does not include costs to correct or mitigate the National Security Cutter's structural design deficiencies, additional labor and materials costs resulting from the effects of Hurricane Katrina, and the final costs of a $302 million Request for Equitable Adjustment (REA) that the Coast Guard is currently negotiating with the contractor. Finally, the report states that the Inspector General's Office ``encountered resistance'' from the Coast Guard and the contractor in its efforts to evaluate the structural design and performance issues associated with the cutter.

The IG's findings are very serious and I am deeply concerned about the Coast Guard's ability to manage the Deepwater program. Strict Congressional oversight on the part of the new Democratic Congress has forced the Coast Guard to make several significant changes to this much-needed program and continued oversight is needed. The Homeland Security Committee has already held one hearing on the Deepwater Program this year, and more are planned.

H.R. 2722 makes improvements to the Deepwater program that will refine the process and make it effective for protecting the homeland for decades to come. For instance this bill creates a process for the Coast Guard to become the lead systems integrator for the program, it opens up competition for procurements, requires the Coast Guard to provide life-cycle cost estimates, requires the appointment of a Chief Acquisitions Officer, establishes testing and certification requirements for Deepwater assets, provides design criteria for the National Security Cutter, and allows the Department of Homeland Security to work with the United States Navy. These changes to the program are necessary to make Deepwater an effective homeland security program.