Floor Statements

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman yielding me time. I also want to pay tribute to the gentleman before he leaves us. I believe this is your last effort, Mr. Sabo. You have been a very, very good person to work with on the committee. I wish you well. I am not sure what the future holds, but I know it is very positive.

Mr. Chairman, in the 3 short years since the Department came into existence, it has been in a constant state of transition and turmoil. Chronically

understaffed at the border and in our airports, the Department has had to execute its critical national security mission without the people and resources it needs.

Time and again the dedicated men and women of the Department of Homeland Security are asked to do more with less. There have been numerous turnovers at the highest level in the Department. In a week from today, the 2006 hurricane season will begin and FEMA is still not fully staffed. The Department also has a significant number of leadership vacancies, including the chief financial officer, the chief privacy officer, the commissioner of customs of border protection, and the Under Secretary of Science and Technology. There are so many ``actings'' at the Department that the agency might want to start handing out Screen Actor Guild cards.

Seriously, it is no wonder that morale at the Department is practically dead last among all Federal agencies. This bill funds the Department at $33 billion, 5 percent over last year's funding measure. I am glad that we were able to increase the budget without raising the passenger ticket tax, but the level of resources provided is far short of what is needed to make real progress in the war on terror and partner effectively with State and local governments as well as the private sector.

Grants and training programs are funded at $2.5 billion. That is just 2 percent over what was provided to our communities to train and equip emergency responders last year. At this rate we are not even keeping up with inflation.

This bill also does not fulfill the funding commitments made in the 9/11 act. It does not fund 2,000 more Border Patrol agents. It does not fund 8,000 new detention beds. It does not fund 800 new immigration investigators. No wonder the border, Mr. Chairman, is in crisis.

If we are not willing to fully invest in securing the border permanently, what do we expect? The decision to send our already overtaxed National Guard to the border is a Band-Aid solution to hide the fact that we are failing the good men and women of the Border Patrol, ICE and CBP by not giving them the resources and additional support they need to do their job.

The bulk of my criticism is not for the appropriators. It is for the administration. The parameters for this year's appropriations were dangerously unrealistic. Mr. Obey attempted to correct this shortfall and infuse another $3.5 billion into the Department. Had the money been appropriated, the Department would be in better position to meet its responsibilities to the American people.

The Department is in its toddler years, barely out of the terrible twos. It is going to take a significant commitment by this Congress to do the oversight and provide the support needed if the Department is to ever grow into the Federal agency that Congress envisioned and the American people deserve.

Mr. Chairman, I again want to pay tribute to Mr. Sabo for guiding us during our terrible twos and threes in this Department. We wish him well.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in favor of the amendment offered by my colleague from Minnesota.

Whether it is breeding grounds in the north or wintering grounds in the south, the Wetland Reserve Program--WRP--is worthy of strong funding. Besides wildlife habitat restoration, WRP has an impressive record of providing flood protection, improving water quality and conserving water quantity.

Farmer interest in these programs greatly exceeds the availability of funds. For example, in 2005 in my district, there were 240 farmers with unfunded applications totaling 34,000 acres and $49 million. These lands are marginal, high risk lands that are vulnerable both to floods and droughts because of the high content of hydric soils. These marginal lands detract from a farmer's cash flow and tend to experience repeated losses requiring disaster recovery assistance. Furthermore, it has been shown that WRP can reduce expenses in Federal crop insurance and other farm programs.

WRP provides a lump sum easement payment that assists financially distressed farmers. The easement payment may be used to pay off current debts or to meet current operating fund needs. Additionally, WRP may provide farmers with both a temporary alternative source of income through the wetlands restoration contract and a permanent source of income from the recreational and lease hunting income generated by the restored wetland wildlife habitat. The public benefits from both the reduced demand placed on disaster assistance funds from lands that previously experienced repeated losses and from significant long-term conservation benefits obtained from the protection of wildlife habitat, improvement of water quality, increase of flood storage and reduction of soil erosion.

As the ranking member of the Homeland Security Committee, I have seen avian influenza become increasingly more important. Although there has not been a case of a human contracting the disease from a wild bird anywhere in the world, it is feasible. The more we can disperse wild birds and improve their overall health, the less risk we will have, especially in an area that my colleague from Minnesota and I represent, the Mississippi Flyway.

Let's not continue with empty rhetoric of supporting the 2002 farm bill. In 2002 we passed a farm bill consisting of an annual 250,000 acres of land to be enrolled in the WRP. If we are going to say that we support the 2002 farm bill, then we should support this amendment because it does just that and I strongly encourage its adoption.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize the life and legacy of an African-American pilot and hero, LeRoy W. Homer, Jr., the First Officer of United Airlines Flight 93, which crashed into a reclaimed coal-mining area near Stonycreek and Shanksville on September 11, 2001.

At an early age, LeRoy W. Homer, Jr. knew that he wanted to be a pilot. As a child, LeRoy assembled model airplanes, collected aviation memorabilia and read books on aviation. LeRoy was 15 years old when he started flight instruction in Cessna 152. Working part-time jobs after school to pay for flying lessons, he completed his first solo at 16 years old, and obtained his private pilot's certificate in 1983.

In the fall of 1983, LeRoy entered the Air Force Academy, and graduated with the Class of 1987, 31st Squadron. After completing pilot training in 1988, he was assigned to McGuire AFB in New Jersey, flying the C-141B Starlifter. While on active duty, LeRoy served in Desert Shield and Desert Storm, and later supported operations in Somalia. He received many commendations, awards and medals during his military career. In 1993, he was named the 21st Air Force Aircrew Instructor of the Year. LeRoy achieved the rank of Captain before his honorable discharge from active duty in 1995.

LeRoy continued his military career as a reservist, initially as an instructor pilot with the 356th Airlift Squadron at Wright Patterson AFB, Ohio, then subsequently as an Academy Liaison Officer, recruiting potential candidates for both the Air Force Academy and the Air Force Reserve Officer Training Corps. During his time with the Reserves, he achieved rank of Major.

LeRoy continued his flying career by joining United Airlines in May 1995. His first assignment was Second Officer on the B727. He then upgraded to First Officer on the B757/767 in 1996, where he remained until September 11, 2001.

On September 11, 2001, LeRoy was flying with Captain Jason Dahl on United Flight 93. Based on information from several sources that day, we know LeRoy and Jason were the first to fight against the terrorist threat to the airplane.

LeRoy was able to accomplish much in his short life. He was able to do so because of the support of his family and friends, and the encouragement of his teachers and mentors. For his actions on board Flight 93, Homer received many awards and citations posthumously, including honorary membership in the historic Tuskegee Airmen, the Congress of Racial Equality's Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Award, the Southern Christian Leadership Conference Drum Major for Justice Award, and the Westchester County Trailblazer Award.

Above all of the accolades and awards, it is because of Homer's sacrifice that I pay tribute. I take great pride in recognizing Mr. LeRoy W. Homer, Jr., an African-American hero.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in favor of H.R. 4200, the Forest Emergency Recovery and Research Act (FERRA).

Many of you are supporting this bill because of wild fires. My state and I have a different, but just as important need. Hurricane Katrina caused the largest single forest and wildlife habitat devastation in our Nation's history--5 million acres--and it did not discriminate between public or private land or the rich, poor or the middle class. She was an equal opportunity destroyer. By the way, this represents 19 billion board feet of timber with a value of $5 billion. This is enough timber to build 800,000 homes and make 25 million tons of paper and paperboard.)

National Wildlife Refuges, National Parks and National Forests were all severely damaged. The DeSoto National Forest was hit the hardest. But besides trees, we had a diversity of plants and animals that lost their homes too. In fact, the damage left by Katrina is the largest single devastation of fish and wildlife habitat since the Exxon Valdez.

I have witnessed the devastated, high quality forests of the DeSoto degrade to a point that we must appropriate many millions to clean up the debris and recover this forest. That was not necessary.

By acting in a timely manner as FERRA will allow, we can salvage valuable wood products before they deteriorate. This will generate much needed dollars for rural schools and return more dollars to federal and state treasuries. It will also generate funds to restore the homes of wildlife and the citizens of places like the Gulf Coast and New Orleans.

We don't need to cut down live trees that are valuable at producing oxygen, sequestering carbon dioxide and providing fish and wildlife habitat when we can use ones that are already damaged. It's just common sense.

As the first member of my party to co-sponsor the Healthy Forests Restoration Act, I ask you to vote in favor of H.R. 4200.

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

Madam Chairman, first, I would like to thank Chairman King and Chairman Lungren for working with me and other members on the committee to produce the bill before us today.

I especially want to commend my colleagues, Ms. Loretta Sanchez and Ms. Harman, for their hard work on this bill and on port security in general. Many provisions in this bill came from legislation they have introduced over the last 2 years, and for that I thank them. They have been leaders on this issue, and we need to give them credit before we discuss the full ramifications of this bill.

Madam Chairman, this bill represents an important step toward improving our port security, but it is only a step. We need to do more to get it right. I could talk about the good things in the bill; but with this limited time, I would like to focus on what is not in the bill. These are the things that are going to keep us up at night after today's votes are over.

Yesterday during Rules, it was said by folks on the other side that we need to look at where threats exist and do something that makes us a little safer. ``A little safer'' is simply not good enough after 9/11, and the threats left undone by this bill are significant.

I worry that unsecured nuclear materials, and there is a lot of that wandering around the Russian countryside, will be shipped here hidden in a cargo container that sails into Miami, New York, Houston, New Orleans, Los Angeles or Oakland. From there, the cargo container will be put on a train or truck headed to places like Chicago, St. Louis, Austin, Milwaukee, or Detroit. As the train or truck passes by our schools, homes, or who knows what else, what is going to stop a terrorist from detonating it. If this happens, what will my colleagues across the aisle recommend Congress tell Americans, we didn't know it would happen?

After 9/11 when terrorists surprised us by using our own airplanes against us, we cannot say we did not expect the unexpected. We must do better. It is our job to prevent disaster from happening, not react after the fact. We had the opportunity to do that today.

We could have voted on my amendment increasing the number of Customs and Border Patrol officers at our ports, but the amendment was not allowed on the floor. All the talk on border and port security means little if we do not have the boots on the ground to check what is coming into our Nation before it arrives here or before it leaves a foreign port.

And we could have ensured that more than the 5 percent of our cargo entering the country is scanned by voting on

the Markey-Nadler amendment on cargo screening.

Madam Chairman, 5 percent does not make America a little safer; but the 95 percent of cargo left unchecked leaves us a lot less safe. This is not rocket science, Madam Chairman. Technology exists to scan cargo. It is being used in Hong Kong as we speak. It can be bought over the counter, and the amendment offered by my colleagues would have given DHS up to 5 years to get it right.

This bill is a good first step, but we need to start making giant steps to keep up with the terrorists.

Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Loretta Sanchez), the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Economic Security, Infrastructure Protection and Cybersecurity, who did a lot of work on this bill, particularly the section improving the C-TPAT process. Many of the provisions in this bill also come from a provision introduced by the gentlewoman, H.R. 4355, introduced in the 108th Congress.

Madam Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman) who is one of the original co- authors of this bill and has worked tirelessly to get us to the floor here today.

Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).

Madam Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell).

Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Etheridge).

Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin).

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the author of the Markey amendment, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), a champion for 100 percent cargo screening here in this Congress.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, I support this amendment. The provisions on trade and maritime domain awareness it contains are strong improvements to the bill.

However, I must express my deep disappointment with one provision in the bill removed by this amendment. In committee, we included language that would have assured that the Coast Guard did not have to use bubble gum, bailing wire, and buckets in the coming years. This language was stripped out of the bill, meaning that we are going to have to make the Coast Guard spend the next two decades fighting a 21st century war on terror with assets built during the Vietnam War.

The Deepwater Program must be accelerated if our ports and coastlines are going to be safe. I know that if Chairman King had had his way this would have stayed in, and I thank him for that.

I am a strong supporter of this program. As a conferee on the last two Coast Guard authorization bills, I supported more funding for the Deepwater Program each year.

At one time during Hurricane Katrina, the Coast Guard used 78 Deepwater assets in Hurricane Katrina relief to save 33,000 people. One would think that the administration would be asking for more money for this type of equipment, not less.

The Commandant of the Coast Guard, ADM Thomas Collins, told me in February of this year that the Coast Guard can accelerate the completion of the Deepwater Program if given the funding, and that it would result in a large savings to the taxpayers.

I hope this Congress will reconsider accelerating Deepwater in the conference on this bill.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands (Mrs. Christensen).

Mr. Chairman, in support of the amendment, I would like to compliment our chairman on really pulling together a good bill. Even though there were differences, we did the best we could to work those differences out in what I consider a very fair and reasonable manner; and I want to compliment him for that. I was able to in the course of this discussion go to New York and look at some of the fine things going there. So, Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.

The gentleman from New Jersey has indicated support for the Deepwater Program, additional monies for the assets. I look forward to supporting that effort.

The Coast Guard, as we know, serves a wonderful purpose. We need to make sure they have the assets to get the job done. So I look forward to working with him on that.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of the time.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to offer the Stupak amendment at this time.

Mr. Chairman, I support this amendment which will ensure that port security grant funds be used by ports to purchase communication equipment that is interoperable with Federal, State and local communication systems.

I have been in countless hearings in the Department of Homeland Security Committee where first responders have told us how year after year they have not been able to communicate with each other.

I have also heard testimony from the operators of critical infrastructure such as hospitals affected by Hurricane Katrina who also still cannot communicate with government officials in an emergency.

We have not yet had a terrorist attack on a port in the United States, but I do not want to wait until one occurs to find out whether port operators face similar challenges.

Allowing port security grants funds to be used by ports to build interoperable communication systems will ensure that if an attack does occur at a U.S. port we are ready for it.

As a result, Mr. Chairman, I support this amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous consent request to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak).

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

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Connecticut for yielding me the time.

Mr. Chairman, I support the amendment. Many Democrats on the Homeland Security Committee have been asking for a long time why DHS is not more seriously looking at the ICIS system, and we have never gotten an answer from them.

The ICIS system proves that we can scan every container leaving for the U.S. without interrupting the flow of commerce. The Markey-Nadler amendment would exactly use technology like this if it had been allowed to have been debated here today. Unfortunately, we could not.

We cannot accept anything less than 100 percent container screening coming into this country. So I am in support of Mr. Shays's amendment. This at least moves us forward. It is unfortunate that we have to take baby steps rather than giant steps. But for the sake of moving forward, we support the amendment, and I compliment the gentleman from Connecticut for offering the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentlelady allowing me to speak in support of her amendment. We absolutely need to work with communities around ports. Those communities, just like other communities, are at risk, not only to what comes into those communities but also many of the people who live in the communities.

So we are happy to support the gentlelady's amendment. Citizen preparedness is what we should be about. It is absolutely important. We support the amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida for allowing me to speak against this rule.

Mr. Speaker, I do not support this rule as it flies in the face of bipartisanship shown by the Homeland Security Committee. It is inexcusable to not allow an up or down vote on many of the amendments that appeared before the Rules Committee, including my amendment increasing the number of Customs inspectors assigned at seaports, the Nadler-Markey amendment advocating 100 percent phase-in screening of cargo, and the Langevin amendment on radiation portal monitoring.

Silencing debate on port security and not allowing Republican and Democrats of this House to consider those amendments on the floor keep all of us from doing our jobs constituents put us here to do.

If those who refuse to allow these amendments to be considered by the House did so because they were afraid that they were not going to pass, then I ask them to think about this: maybe these amendments would have passed because they are sound policy and the types of things that we need to do, serve and protect the American people.

If they were refused because the majority did not want to take hard votes that their constituents might disagree with, I implore those who make these decisions to put America's safety first before politics. We must remember that homeland security is not a Democratic or Republican issue, it is an American issue; and those in this House must treat it as so.

If our ports are attacked, if a cargo container is blown up, those affected will be all stripes, colors and political affiliations. It is about time this House started legislating as such.

Mr. Speaker, let us look at the amendments the Rules majority refused to give an up or down vote on.

First, my amendment authorized $67 million for 400 Customs and Border Patrol inspectors to be assigned at seaports over the next 4 years. With all of the talk of how we need to shore up our ports here and abroad, why not put our money where our mouth is and get enough people to do the job? One of the major deficiencies of our port security is that we do not have enough inspectors at U.S. and foreign seaports.

Second, the rule rejects Mr. Langevin's amendment which increases radiation portal monitors, increases funding by $117 million. What is the majority afraid of? That the American people may discover that this

country spends 57 times the amount of money on a missile defense system that does not work?

Finally, this rule does not include the amendment offered by Representatives Nadler, Markey and Oberstar, requiring 100 percent container scanning phased in over 5 years. Currently, only about 5 percent of that cargo is screened; 95 percent is not. This amendment would have fixed that.

Let's stop playing politics with America's security. Let's have an open exchange of ideas. It is about time that we stopped hiding behind rules that leave America less secure.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize an African American pioneer, Willie Carson, Greenville's first African- American police officer. I submit the following article by Bill Johnson of the Delta Democrat Times.

Greenville--Another Delta Pioneer Has Passed

Willie Carson, the first African-American police officer in

Greenville, died Friday evening. He was 86 years old.

Carson forged the way for other black law enforcement

officers to follow in the early 1950s, working as a beat

officer on Nelson Street.

``Those were some really rough days back then,'' said his

wife of 20 years, Delilah Carson. She recalled some of the

many stories told by her husband of his early experiences in

uniform from their Fairview Extended home.

``At that particular time, a lot of blacks were killing

each other on Nelson. Back then, it was not so much with guns

but knives and their fists,'' she said. ``It was a real war

zone out there at the time.

``C.A. Hollinsworth was the chief at that time. And he knew

that changes were coming and a new day was ahead,'' she

reflected.

``Winchester Davis was very instrumental in helping Willie

get on the force. Willie played guitar for Davis' band, and

they traveled a lot. He knew Willie had a family with

children and needed a good job with benefits, and made a way

for him.''

Carson took his oath to uphold the law, and he made sure

that everyone on his beat abided by the law.

He was smooth and quiet in manner but when necessary made a

firm stand.

``A lot of people have come up to him over the years and

thanked him for changing their lives.'' Carson said. ``If

need be, he could get down and dirty right along with them.

And sometimes it was necessary.''

While rumors abounded about the reasons Carson was given

the Nelson Street beat, she was told by Willie that it was a

matter of support.

``Hollinsworth knew that if anything went down on the

Nelson Street beat, someone would speak up for Willie and

give support for him. But remember, this was the early '50s

still, and not many whites were going to go against another

white person's word if they were arrested by a colored

officer. So it was the best choice for the times,'' Carson

said.

Willie Carson was also really good friends with former

police chief and mayor, William Burnley. They spent a lot of

time together and even called each other brother.

``They had a very unique relationship,'' Delilah recalled.

Joe Tinsley, a long-time Nelson Street business owner, also

recalled Carson's tenure on the beat. ``He was a true pioneer

in police work, being a black man back in those days,''

Tinsely said from his barber shop on the corner of Nelson and

Edison. ``And boy what a heck of a guitar player.''

Tinsley recalled Carson as a hard-working man who always

had several jobs along with playing his guitar for a variety

of bands, including Ike Turner, Winchester Davis, Big Joe,

and others.

``He had a rocky road those early years, with the name

calling and all. But he broke through the ice and opened the

door for all black law enforcement officers to follow,''

Tinsley said. ``And as time went on, Carson was very much

respected. They wouldn't raise any hell or cuss around

Officer Carson. It was tough on him, but he was the right man

for the job and he made it work.''

Carson is remembered by his family as a good husband,

father and provider who loved his family and children; a man

who believed in being in line with the law.

He was the type of fellow who was known for a good joke and

appreciated a better one. He was the go-to guy during the

boycotts at Mississippi Valley State College in 1969, where

he served as chief of campus police, telling his men, ``We

are here to protect these students and the faculty. And

that's what I expect you to do.''

There were no major injuries on his watch, even when

meeting face to face and at odds with members of the Black

Panthers organization.

Carson was also the first black housing inspector in

Greenville, and served as the grand marshal of the 2003

Christmas Parade.

In later years, Carson served with the Washington County

Sheriffs Department from 1989 until his retirement in 2000.

He was never a bitter man and was considered rather jolly

and outgoing.

``He tried to find the best in even a bad situation,''

Delilah said, adding that he would often tell his children,

``Sometimes you can't get around a problem, but you can

always make good choices.''

Officer Willie Carson's career and faithful service to the community is a testament to his character. Carson's first probably will not be noted in history books, but it is his service and men and women of similar character that has paved the way for other outstanding African Americans to outfit our public services. It is with great honor, I recognize Officer Willie Carson, a true pioneer.

Mr. Chairman, today I rise in strong opposition to the fiscal year 2007 House budget resolution, a resolution that shortchanges our critical homeland security programs.

The funding provided under this measure leaves dangerous gaps in our Nation's border, ports, mass transit, aviation, and critical infrastructure security. It also fails to address the preparedness and response deficiencies laid bare by Hurricane Katrina.

When Katrina struck the gulf coast, it was a frightening wakeup call to our Nation that we could not handle a response to a major incident, regardless of whether it was a terrorist attack or natural disaster. Regrettably, the House budget resolution, like the President's budget request, continues a 4-year trend of underfunding the Department of Homeland Security and homeland security programs across the Federal Government.

The most egregious cuts and eliminations are to programs that assist our local and State officials in preparing for and responding to emergencies. The budget slashes first responder funding by $570 million. The Local Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program is completely eliminated. Communities across the Nation have come to rely on the program to help with information sharing among local law enforcement agencies as well as counterterrorism and security planning.

Like the President's budget, this budget unjustifiably cuts critical firefighter grant programs. The SAFER Act firefighter hiring program is eliminated. The FIRE Act grant program is cut by 50 percent. Together these programs are critical to ensuring that our local fire departments can recruit and retain firefighters and give them the tools they need to respond to emergencies and disasters. These programs should be increased, Mr. Chairman, not decimated.

Another grant program that is slashed under the budget is the Emergency Management Performance grants. This program is the singular Federal program for State and local all-hazards preparedness and readiness. Communities use this money to develop disaster plans, sheltering strategies, and evacuation routes.

In 2004, even before the name ``Katrina'' became synonymous with misery and loss, NEMA reported that this program faced a $260 million shortfall. Just 2 days ago, expert hurricane forecasters told America to prepare for another bad hurricane season. They predicted that the east coast chances of being hit this year had doubled to more than 60 percent. Yet here we are today considering a budget that slashes Emergency Management Performance grants. I hope the forecasters are wrong; but if they are right, Mr. Chairman, I for one do not want to be standing here 6 months from now if New Jersey, Long Island, or some other populated east coast center is hit, saying we could have done something.

Not only does this budget shortchange our communities, Mr. Chairman, but it also turns its back on them when it comes to covering the cost of keeping dangerous and criminal aliens incarcerated. The President's budget calls for the elimination of the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program. This resolution before us today does nothing to remedy that. With all the President's tough talk on border security, you would think that he would want to at least keep the most violent and dangerous illegal immigrants off our streets. Instead, this budget cuts the one program dedicated to helping our local cops and sheriffs put behind bars those who are breaking laws. Even Republicans last year disagreed with the President and joined Democrats in approving $405 million for the SCAAP program.

What has changed this year? They no longer want the criminals off the streets?

The budget also ignores the wakeup calls that came in 2004 and 2005 when terrorists executed coordinated rush hour train and bus bombings in Madrid and London. The budget does not provide dedicated funds to close known gaps in rail and mass transit systems to protect 14 million Americans, who use nearly 6,000 public transportation systems each day.

Under this budget, State and local transit agencies, which have already spent $2 billion to enhance security and emergency preparedness since 9/11 attacks, continue to be left largely to fend for themselves.

We are shortchanging the Coast Guard in this budget. That agency, which did the right thing in Hurricane Katrina, is using ships from the Vietnam era. In using these Vietnam-era ships, we put our Coast Guard at risk. This budget will ensure one thing: that the Coast Guard with need a lot of bubblegum, bailing wire, and buckets to stay afloat if it is approved.

Speaking of maritime security, this budget does little to ensure that ports can make the physical security improvements they need for high- risk containers coming to America.

I call on my colleagues to reject this budget for these reasons. Congress should no longer ignore the fact that homeland security begins at home, in our communities, towns, and in our cities. Let us do the right thing by the American people. Let us put a budget together that protects our Nation.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Schiff for putting this Special Order together to give us an opportunity to talk about real security from the Democratic standpoint.

As you know, unlike my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, we have a plan. That plan is very simple. If we can get additional support, we can make this country safer. But for this hour, let us talk a little bit about homeland security.

First of all, I want to take you to the notion that as a grandfather, I spend a lot of time reading children's stories. It may be because I am the ranking member on the Homeland Security Committee, but recently I was reading the ``Emperor's New Clothes,'' and I could not help but think about the Department of Homeland Security.

For those of you who are not familiar with the story, it is about a ruler who loved to dress up in the finest threads. One day some folks came by and promised to make him the finest suit he had ever seen. As they made it, they kept asking him what he thought about the beautiful cloth and the fine design. Not seeing anything but feeling a little naive, the emperor said it was beautiful.

When the day came for him to wear the suit out in public, he called a big parade and put on the so-called outfit. Everyone ``oohed'' and ``aahed'' until one small child spoke out and said those magic words, ``He doesn't have anything on.''

Why does that story remind me of the current administration's homeland security efforts? Because DHS is like the naked emperor. Despite the Department's many press releases of success, the agency's efforts are not enough to cover our Nation's critical parts. Like the citizens of the emperor's town, we all want to believe what we are hearing and seeing is sufficient. But let me tell you, it is not.

If you have any doubts about this, just look at the government's response to Hurricane Katrina last year. As Clark Kent Ervin, the former inspector general of the Department has said, if Katrina was a dress rehearsal on how the U.S. would respond to a terrorist attack, we are not prepared. A lot needs to be done to ensure homeland security is covered. Our security gaps at our borders must be eliminated. Our trains and subways must be protected so we do not have a London or Madrid attack.

Our ports must be secure, and our Coast Guard must be well funded. That means we must work with our partners internationally to protect our ports by screening 100 percent of the U.S.-bound containers at their points of origin rather than waiting until they arrive at our port communities.

Those flying the friendly skies should be safe as they are carried to their final destination. That means we must secure our passenger airlines by requiring 100 percent screening of air cargo that travels on the same plane with the passengers. We must have commonsense security at chemical and nuclear

plants. The private sector is looking for guidance from the Department. We need to be sure that they have it. We must ensure that hazardous cargo is carried safely through our communities.

Also, we must guarantee that our local cops, firemen, and EMTs have the training, staffing, equipment, and technology they need so that they can talk to each other during an emergency. As you know, we saw with 9/11 that a lot of the individuals involved in that situation could not communicate with each other and many of them lost their lives because of it.

Now, when the small child called the emperor out, he knew the child was right, but thought the procession goes on. He carries himself proudly and his assistants acted like they were keeping his invisible robe off the ground.

The Department's procession absolutely cannot go on. I ask my colleagues across the aisle to stop carrying this invisible robe and join us in recognizing that the Department of Homeland Security has been without clothes for way too long. It is about time that we outfitted the agency so that it can fulfill its mission. Our Nation and its citizens deserve no less.

None of it makes sense. The other thing is, we have the technology available to us to do many of these things. We have to have the will to produce the resources necessary to acquire the technology in order for that to occur.

We have tried in our committees to fully fund all of the screening programs, not just at airports, but we are talking about screening cargo coming into our country. But we can't get the support on the Republican side of the aisle to move in that direction.

We have two government agencies, Department of Energy and Department of Homeland Security, charged with radiation screening of certain activities. We can't even get support to merge the two programs. They are operating in ports separate and apart. So clearly, there are a number of things, Congressman Schiff, that we need to do.

Well, it is not. And what we find is there are a substantial number of containers that come to this country, as you know, without any inspection. To inspect it when it gets to our shores, if it is a dirty bomb or anything like that, is unacceptable. We have to do the inspections or the screenings at a minimum at the points of origin rather than when they get to this country. If we don't, we are in for a rude awakening.

The other point I want to make, and I want to thank you for this time, is we clearly have to support financially the safeguards that are required. We have the technology. We have to make sure that we put the resources to support the technology.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize Coach Thomas Billups, head coach of the State Champion, Lanier High School Boys Basketball Team. I submit the following article by Bill Spencer of the Clarion Ledger Newspaper of Jackson, Mississippi.

Fiery Coach Thomas Billups has created a dynasty. Thomas

Billups doesn't want to come off as boastful, even though his

success may be unmatched in the history of Mississippi high

school boys basketball.

He's a staunch believer in his methods, however, and who

can argue with the veteran Lanier coach's incredible run?

``I'm not saying I'm the greatest coach ever,'' said

Billups, whose Bulldogs (34-3) won their final 19 games and

finished No. 1 in The Clarion-Ledger Super 10 rankings for

the second consecutive year. ``There are a lot of good

coaches out there. I'm not saying everything I do is right.

But what I'm doing . . . there's been some good in it.

Because look at what we've done.''

In 15 seasons, Billups has coached in 12 state finals,

including eight in a row. Last Thursday, he guided the

Bulldogs to a second straight Class 4A state championship,

tying him with Gulfport's legendary Bert Jenkins for the most

Mississippi High School Activities Association boys state

titles with seven.

Lanier won again despite the graduation of McDonald's All-

American Monta Ellis, who jumped to the NBA.

Billups, 53, has built a hoops machine on Maple Street in

Jackson. Not even Jenkins--who won 866 games in 28 seasons--

coached in eight consecutive state finals.

With a 463-73 record shouting orders from Lanier's bench,

the demonstrative Billups has averaged more than 30 victories

per year and won an astounding 86 percent of the time.

Billups' latest gold ball may be his most satisfying.

Although senior point guard Al Graham, junior guard R.L.

Horton and senior forward Kalauso Williams entered this

season with some experience, most of the Bulldogs were new

faces.

``We were young, but these kids wanted to be just like

these Lanier teams that came through here,'' Billups said.

``They do everything I ask them to do to win a ballgame.''

Lavel Johnson, the Mississippi correspondent for the

recruiting magazine Hoop Scoop, believes Billups will cherish

this state crown the most.

``This was his top coaching job,'' said Johnson, who has

watched Jackson basketball for 20 years. ``This title is very

satisfying for him because for so many years, people have

said he wins because of his talent and not because he's a

good coach. If anything dispels that belief, this does.''

Billups' in-your-face style is relentless. During games, he

alternates between chewing on referees and yelling at his

players. Rarely does he sit. He paces the sidelines, roaring

like an angry, nattily attired bear. Sometimes, he'll stop,

arms folded, and scowl, staring at a striped shirt--or

player--who has done him wrong.

He plays no favorites, either, and will berate a player for

a mistake in a flash, whether the Bulldogs are leading by two

points or 20.

``Whatever goes for one player goes for all of them,''

Billups said. ``You've got to let kids know that there's only

one way, the coach's way. In my case, it's Billups' way. My

style of coaching is not going to change. Kids need to know

that I'm going to be in their face every practice, every

game, screaming and hollering.''

Horton has come to appreciate Billups' tactics.

``He puts you through a lot,'' said Horton, who averaged

about 25 points per game, scoring a career-high 50 twice.

``He makes you feel like you almost want to quit. Players

ahead of me like Monta used to tell me to stick with it

because it's going to make me better. He sees a player's

potential before they ever see it. He brought a lot of stuff

out of me that I didn't ever think I could do. He makes

players work their hardest.''

For all of his bluntness, there's also a gentler side to

Billups, whether he's attending church with his team or

hosting a Super Bowl party.

Many have noticed, including Lee Vance, a Jackson Police

Department veteran of nearly 19 years and Lanier alumnus,

Class of 1976.

``The greatest tribute I've ever seen or read is what his

players and former players said about him publicly, the

father-figure and nurturing comments that have been made,''

said Vance, JPD's Precinct 2 commander.

Former Lanier coach N.Z. Bryant, who won one of the

Bulldogs' 15 state titles in 1969, said Billups enjoys a

special bond with his players.

``Coach Billups has control of his players and they respect

him,'' said Bryant, now deputy director of the MHSAA. ``Young

players nowadays have a tendency to have their own mind.

Those kids are going to run exactly what he says.''

Coach Thomas Billups has built a winning tradition and legacy in Jackson's inner-city. The high-level, high-profile programs that Billups has put together have ignited the competitive fancies of the other inner city teams making for some of the most competitively rivaled basketball in the State. I take pride in recognizing Coach Thomas Billups and the dynasty that he has built with some of our most talented inner-city young men.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of defeating the previous question so that we may offer a proposal to ensure that America's ports remain safe.

As we all know, a company owned by the government of the United Arab Emirates is attempting to purchase another company that runs several port terminals throughout the United States.

Even though the law requires an extra 45 days to investigate a contract like this if there is even a chance that it could threaten national security, the Bush administration chose to approve the deal without the extra investigation.

The administration approved the deal, even though we now know that a classified Coast Guard report said the deal might be a security risk.

The President and the UAE company have now voluntarily agreed to an extra 45-day investigation. But that is no longer good enough. We simply cannot trust this administration to get it right.

If we defeat the previous question, we will offer a bipartisan bill that I have introduced along with chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, Peter King, giving Congress the authority to prohibit the deal if the President decides to let us go forward when the investigation is over.

Mr. Speaker, an extra provision has been added to Chairman King's bill to ensure that congressional leadership

cannot prevent Congress from taking action. The UAE deal is just further proof that we cannot get our port security right with this administration.

The 9/11 Commission said that the threat to our ports is as great, if not greater, than the 9/11 attacks.

And how has this administration responded? It has not dedicated enough personnel and resources to the two programs, CSI and CT-PAT, that are designed to secure our ports. As a result, high-risk container shipments enter the U.S. unchecked.

It has not created standards for container security to keep terrorists from tampering with our cargo. It has only deployed radiation detectors to equip 25 percent of the Nation's seaports. It only screens about 6 percent of the cargo that comes into this country.

Mr. Speaker, we have a problem. Our ports are not secure. By defeating this measure, we will give an opportunity for this Congress to vote on securing our ports.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of resolution (H. Res. 655) honoring the life and accomplishments of Mrs. Coretta Scott King and her contributions as a leader in the struggle for civil rights, and I also express my heart felt condolences to the King family on her passing.

As the wife of Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., Mrs. King was recognized by many as the ``first lady'' of the Civil Rights movement. Born and raised in Marion, Alabama, Coretta Scott graduated valedictorian from Lincoln High School. She received a B.A. in music and education from Antioch College in Yellow Springs, Ohio, and then went on to study concert singing at Boston's New England Conservatory of Music, where she earned a degree in voice and violin. While in Boston she met Martin Luther King, Jr. who was then studying for his doctorate in systematic theology at Boston University. They were married on June 18, 1953, and in September 1954 took up residence in Montgomery, Alabama, with Coretta Scott King assuming the many functions of pastor's wife at Dexter Avenue Baptist Church.

During Dr. King's career, Mrs. King devoted most of her time to raising their four children: Yolanda Denise (1955), Martin Luther, III (1957), Dexter Scott (1961), and Bernice Albertine (1963). She performed a series of Freedom Concerts which combined prose and poetry narration with musical selections and functioned as fundraisers for the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, the direct action organization of which Dr. King served as first president.

In 1957, she and Dr. King journeyed to Ghana to mark that country's independence. In 1958, they spent a belated honeymoon in Mexico, where they observed first-hand the immense gulf between extreme wealth and extreme poverty. In 1959, Dr. and Mrs. King spent nearly a month in India on a pilgrimage to disciples and sites associated with Mahatma Gandhi. In 1964, she accompanied him to Oslo, Norway, where he received the Nobel Peace Prize. Even prior to her husband's public stand against the Vietnam War in 1967, Mrs. King functioned as liaison to peace and justice organizations, and as mediator to public officials on behalf of the unheard.

In 1969, Coretta Scott King published the first volume of her autobiography, My Life with Martin Luther King Jr. In the 1970s, Mrs. King maintained her husband's commitment to the cause of economic justice. In 1974 she formed the Full Employment Action Council, a broad coalition of over 100 religious, labor, business, civil and women's rights organizations dedicated to a national policy of full employment and equal economic opportunity; Mrs. King served as Co-Chair of the Council.

In 1983, she marked the 20th Anniversary of the historic March on Washington, by leading a gathering of more than 800 human rights organizations, the Coalition of Conscience, in the largest demonstration the capital city had seen up to that time.

Mrs. King and three of her children were arrested in 1985 at the South African embassy in Washington, DC, for protesting against apartheid. Mrs. King led the successful campaign to establish Dr. King's birthday, January 15, as a national holiday in the United States. By an Act of Congress, the first national observance of the holiday took place in 1986. Dr. King's birthday is now marked by annual celebrations in over 100 countries. Mrs. King was invited by President Clinton to witness the historic handshake between Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Chairman Yassir Arafat at the signing of the Middle East Peace Accords.

Mrs. King devoted much of her energy and attention to developing programs and building the Atlanta-based Martin Luther King, Jr. Center for Nonviolent Social Change as a living memorial to her husband's life and dream. Situated in the Freedom Hall complex encircling Dr. King's tomb, The King Center is part of a 23-acre national historic park which includes his birth home, and which hosts over one million visitors a year.

In 1995 she turned over leadership of the King Center to her son, Dexter Scott King, who served as Chairman, President & CEO until January 2004. On that date, Mrs. King was named interim Chair and her eldest son Martin Luther King, III assumed the leadership position of President & CEO.

She remained active in the causes of racial and economic justice, and most recently devoted much of her energy to AIDS education and curbing gun violence.

A woman of wisdom, compassion and vision, Coretta Scott King has tried to make ours a better world and, in the process, has made history. I am saddened by the loss of our ``First Lady''. She met the challenge of preserving the memory of her husband head on. Her tireless work in keeping the dream alive has been invaluable not only to civil rights, but to human rights. Mrs. Coretta Scott King kept the torch burning and as opposed to passing the torch, she lit torches along the way. She is a true inspiration to us all.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize the life and legacy of Kirksey, former Mississippi State Senator, veteran proponent of civil rights and retired Tougaloo College professor.

Henry Kirksey personified the face of bravery. He was the lead plaintiff in most of the redistricting cases brought in Mississippi to bring the state into compliance with the 1965 Voting Rights Act in the late 1960s and early 1970s, when Mississippi was a dangerous place to do so. This was instrumental in opening the door to the creation of fair redistricting plans throughout the State. In 1965, Kirksey filed suit against the State, challenging county-wide election of State Representatives and Senators. That suit resulted in the adoption of single-member legislative districts in 1979.

We blacks elected in the State of Mississippi today owe that election more so to Henry Kirksey than anyone else. As a result of Kirksey's sacrifice, Mississippi today appears to have more African American elected and appointed officials at every level of government than any other State in the Nation. Kirksey's service as a plaintiff, expert witness and community organizer has led to the election of almost 600 African-Americans to public office in Mississippi. As part of this process, Kirksey became the first African American elected to the Mississippi Senate since Reconstruction.

He became known for filing the lawsuit that led to Jackson changing its form of government in 1985 to the mayor-seven-member council system. He also was a member of the group that fought for reapportionment changes in the late 1970s that led to a record number of black candidates being elected to the Legislature. Kirksey was instrumental in challenging the districts from which state court judges ran, resulting in more diversity on the bench.

As a noted map-maker, Kirksey was significant to the formation of Mississippi's majority-black 2nd Congressional District, which I have the distinct pleasure of representing today.

I applaud the life and legacy of Henry Kirksey.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings) yielding me time.

Mr. Speaker, this rule demonstrates that this legislation is simply not ready for consideration by the House. I have worked carefully with my Republican colleague on the Homeland Security Committee, Chairman King, to develop a border security bill that has made many good provisions. This rule defeats that.

We could have given the House a Christmas present of a bipartisan bill that would secure our border in a real and fair way. Now this bill looks like a gift from an extremist Grinch, rather than one from Santa Claus. The Committee on the Judiciary has so loaded up our bill with controversial immigration proposals that now it is opposed by every reasonable business, immigration or human rights group in America. The Irish Lobby for Immigration Reform opposes this bill. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce opposes it. The American Bar Association opposes it. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops opposes it. What reasonable group, Mr. Speaker, does not oppose it?

Now the Republican leadership is grasping for straws as it tries to figure out what amendments can best fit the bill. We are now here debating a rule with only half the amendments to be allowed, but we have not even seen what the final version of the bill looks like. How can we be here debating amendments when we do not even know what we are amending? This feels like another Republican power grab.

Mr. Speaker, we need to go slow and think this thing through. Let us take the bill back to the drawing board and pass a real border security bill that is fair and effective, not a partisan bill that almost no reasonable organization supports. And now, as we are about to return to our districts, let us think about the people that this bill will hurt, what kind of Christmas they will have.

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

Mr. Chairman, it used to be said that we are all either Republicans or we are all Democrats, but I wonder what is happening to this country as I look at this bill. But today that principle is long gone, replaced by partisan efforts to satisfy extremist groups. The Democratic members of the committee of Homeland Security, including myself, Ms. Sanchez, Ms. Lofgren, worked tirelessly with my counterpart, Chairman King, to create a good border security bill that had many, many good provisions; but after that bill left our committee, it fell into partisan hands to satisfy the extremist anti-immigrant groups.

Instead of giving the American people a Christmas present of a bipartisan bill that would secure our borders in a real and fair way, we are giving them a bill that looks more like a gift from an extremist Grinch who stole Christmas and trampled our Constitution on the way. The Judiciary Committee has loaded up our bill with controversial immigration proposals that are now opposed by nearly every reasonable business, immigration, and human rights group in America. I hope my chairman from New York recognizes this.

I know it is difficult, but if you look at the groups that have opposed this piece of legislation, you can understand why it is a bad bill. The Chamber of Commerce opposes this bill. The American Bar Association opposes this bill. The Irish Lobby for Immigration Reform opposes this bill. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops oppose this bill. What reasonable organization is left to support it?

Mr. Chairman, this bill is so ridiculous that, according to the Republican version, Santa Claus himself would be a criminal for trekking from the North Pole to deliver holiday gifts without a visa. This bill is not a step in the right direction. It is time that we pass a real border security bill that is fair and effective, not a partisan bill that does not solve our problem.

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