Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 150th Harford Fair to be held from August 20th to August 25th of the year Two Thousand and Seven, in Harford, Pennsylvania. The Harford Agricultural Society has held the fair as an annual tradition since 1857.

The first fair was held on November 9, 1858, in the sheds around the First Congregational Church. Seventy-six people attended. One of the first recorded exhibits was five heads of cabbage. Each weighed seventeen pounds. A few years later the fair was moved to October. The entrance fee was 10 cents and the main attractions were speakers, brass bands, plowing matches and agricultural displays.

In 1865 the fair doubled in length, spilling over to two bright October days. By 1880, 3,500 people and 1,000 teams of oxen were flocking to the 117 acres of fairground. In the early 1900s the fair hosted the first automobile and victrola, merry-go-rounds, wire walkers, drum corps and the occasional circus. The Lenoxville Band first performed in 1940 and continues to entertain fair-goers.

Now, every year on the third week of August, 65,000 visitors pour into tiny Harford to enjoy one of the few agricultural fairs left in the nation. It has grown into a six day event that allows both the young and old to present handcrafts, agricultural items, fruits, vegetables, baked goods, animals, photography and art work. Last year's fair featured 7,519 items.

The Harford Fair is my hometown fair in Susquehanna County and I am proud to recognize the fair as an enduring tribute to community pride and cooperation. I salute the many tireless volunteers who maintain the Harford Fair and its rich traditions.

In closing, Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing the Harford Fair for 150 years of family entertainment, agricultural displays and community fellowship.

Madam Speaker, today I am introducing the ``TSA Procurement Reform Act of 2007.'' This Act will increase contracting transparency at the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), open opportunities for small businesses, and eliminate wasteful and duplicative bureaucracy. This Act is necessary because TSA was exempted from the near-universal federal contracting system, the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), after the September 11th terrorist attacks.

It makes no sense that every other organization in the Department of Homeland Security--and the vast majority of the federal government--is governed by the Federal Acquisition Regulation, yet TSA plays by its own rules. Even while we are at war, the Department of Defense uses the FAR. This exemption for TSA creates an unnecessary layer of bureaucracy, decreases competition, and shuts out small businesses from too many contracting opportunities.

The legislation will repeal the TSA's exemption from federal contracting laws 180 days after enactment. The legislation is supported by a broad coalition from the oversight and business communities. Citizens Against Government Waste and the Professional Services Council--a trade association representing more than 220 federal contractors--both support the intent of this bill.

Years of contract mismanagement prove that there is no longer justification for the exemption. Over the last several years, the TSA has awarded contracts filled with wasteful spending, including a contract to Boeing that jumped from $508 million to $1.2 billion and a contract to Pearson Government Solutions that first cost $104 million and skyrocketed to $741 million in less than one year.

I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the Capitol and both sides of the aisle to ensure that we strengthen our homeland security as much as possible and eliminate the many deficiencies at DHS and throughout the federal government impeding our Nation from being as safe as we would like.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank Mr. Hastings for the time.

I rise today in support of the rule, certainly.

I find it a little bit odd, perhaps curious, that our friend from Texas on the other side talked about security failures. This talks about fixing security failures. And I am very pleased with this bill and the bipartisan efforts to ensure our Nation's safety and to make our homeland more secure.

Since coming to Congress, one of the first things I have been concerned with is the interoperability question between first responders. The 9/11 Commission in effect cited this as one of the critical weaknesses in our security system. This bill addresses that failure and puts $1.6 billion, in fact, into fixing that and to addressing the problem over 5 years. This is critical for the urban areas and certainly for the rural areas that I represent.

The bill also contains measures to promote information sharing between local, State, and Federal law enforcement officers. This is another recommendation, something we must strengthen.

We have also strengthened efforts to prevent terrorist travel. The bill strengthens the Human Smuggling and Trafficking Center and adds personnel to it, again in direct response to the 9/11 Commission's recommendations.

The bill will also enhance the security in the transportation sector. We must do more to make our transportation infrastructure safe and this does that.

In closing, I urge all my colleagues to support this bipartisan effort to make our Nation safer and to vote in favor of the rule.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Lincoln Falls and Millview Wesleyan Church and their commitment to serving the Sullivan County area for well over 100 years.

The Millview Church was established in 1843 and Lincoln Falls was established in 1877. They celebrated their first annual Camp Meeting in 1907. On July 15, they will celebrate that 100th anniversary.

Dr. Harry F. Wood, the district superintendent, will speak at the celebration service. An old-fashioned picnic will follow.

In closing, Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing the Lincoln Falls and Millview Wesleyan Churches for their 100 years of joint camp meetings and for over 100 years of distinguished service to Sullivan County, PA, and the United States of America.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the Leader, and I rise in support of this resolution. Ethics reform must be more than rhetorical. It simply must be real. I, like many of my colleagues, came to Congress with a promise that corruption should not be tolerated from either party. This is not about partisan politics, but this is rather about upholding strong ethical standards.

I was extremely disappointed to hear that another Member of Congress was indicted on such serious charges and this is not something that we can take lightly. A Member of Congress under such serious charges really should think long and hard about whether or not they can remain in Congress.

This is truly about justice, about doing the right things for the Member of Congress and for the Member of Congress' constituents.

Should the Member, in fighting these allegations, think hard about stepping down? Can the Member truly defend himself or herself and adequately represent the constituents of his or her district?

This is something I think that people under indictment should consider, as well I would encourage Mr. Jefferson to take this under advisement and encourage him to step down.

I rise in support of this resolution. Ethics Reform must be more than rhetorical--it must be real. I came to Congress with a promise that corruption should not be tolerated from either party. This is not about partisan politics; it is about upholding strong ethical standards.

I was extremely disappointed to hear that another Member of Congress is indicted on such serious charges and this is not something that can be taken lightly. A Member of Congress under serious indictment does not belong in the United States House of Representatives.

It is my hope that this situation with Congressman Jefferson can be resolved quickly and judiciously. However, given the serious allegations and ethical issues the indictment presents, I call on Congressman Jefferson to resign from the U.S. House of Representatives.

Madam Speaker, Mr. Chairman, I am here today in support of our Nation's veterans. The GI bill has provided education to many of our Nation's finest honorable men and women. But, unfortunately, there is a provision that excludes our National Guard and Reserve from receiving their GI benefits after they have left the military.

This amendment, which comes from bipartisan legislation that I have introduced on the same topic, will express the sense of Congress that we need to lengthen the period of time that a Guard or Reserve member has to take advantage of the GI bill after he or she completes their service to 10 years. Right now, when they leave the service they lose their educational benefits. If they are deployed, they lose those benefits shortly after they return.

We owe it to our National Guard and Reserve members to have up to 10

years to take advantage of the GI bill of education. This is similar to the benefits extended to active duty members of the military, and our National Guard and Reserve deserve the same benefit because the National Guard and Reserve are playing an ever-increasing role in combat. They are finding it harder and harder to achieve their degrees while enlisted.

Madam Chair, as a lieutenant commander in the U.S. Naval Reserve, I have witnessed firsthand the critical role the National Guard and Reserve play in our Nation's security. It saddens me to learn that the National Guard and Reserves have missed their recruiting goals for 2005 and 2006. The military provides immense benefits to those that sign up, but it cuts off the Guard and Reserve when it comes to education benefits. What better way to ensure our military remains an all- volunteer force by encouraging more people to join the Guard and Reserve?

As a former professor at Penn State, I understand the value of education and believe that an educated workforce is a better workforce for all of America. We want our brave men and women who risk their lives for our country to have access to education. Denying our National Guard and Reserve their education benefits is unfair to our troops, unfair to their families, and hurts our entire country. We should allow our troops to serve their country honorably, and then reward them with higher education when they are finished.

The National Guard and Reserve are becoming indistinguishable from active duty now, and they need this benefit. We owe it to our troops and their military families back home. I urge all Members to support it.

Madam Chairman, I am here today in support of our Nation's Veterans. The GI bill has provided education to many of our Nation's fine and honorable men and women. Unfortunately, there is a provision which excludes our National Guard and Reserves from receiving their GI bill benefits after they have left the military.

This amendment, which comes from the bipartisan legislation that I have introduced on the same topic, will express the sense of Congress that we need to lengthen the period of time that a Guard or Reserve member has to take advantage of the GI bill after he or she completes their service to 10 years. Right now, when they leave the service, they lose their education benefits. If they are deployed, they lose the benefits shortly after.

We owe it to our National Guard and Reserve members to have up to 10 years to take advantage of their GI bill education benefits. This is similar to the benefits extended to active duty members of the military. Our National Guard and Reserves deserve this same benefit. Because the National Guard and Reserves are playing an ever-increasing role in combat operations, they are finding it harder to achieve their degree while enlisted.

As a lieutenant commander in the U.S. Navy Reserve, I have witnessed firsthand the critical role that National Guard and Reserves play in our Nation's security. It saddens me to learn that the National Guard and Reserves missed their recruiting goals in both 2005 and 2006. The military provides immense benefits to those that sign up, but it cuts off the Guard and Reserves when it comes to education benefits. What better way to ensure our military remains an all volunteer force by encouraging more people to join the Guard or Reserves?

As a former professor at Penn State Worthington, I understand the value of education and believe that an educated workforce is a better workforce for all of America. We want our brave men and women who risk their lives for our country to have access to education. Denying our National Guard and Reserves their education benefit is unfair to our troops, unfair to their families, and hurts the entire country.

We should allow our troops to serve their country honorably and reward them with a higher education when finished. The National Guard and Reserves are becoming indistinguishable from active duty now. They need this benefit.

We owe this to our troops and our military families back home. I urge all Members of Congress who care about our troops and military families back home to vote in favor of this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes.

Mr. Chairman, I am here today in support of our Nation's veterans. As a lieutenant commander in the Navy Reserve, I know how important our veterans are. I know how critical our National Guard and Reserve are to the Nation's security.

The Montgomery GI bill has provided education to many of our Nation's fine and honorable men and women. After World War II, the GI bill was signed into law and paved the way for many returning soldiers to attain their degrees. In fact, my father earned both his bachelor's and his master's degrees using the GI bill.

However, for our National Guard and Reserve, this is not the case. There's a provision which excludes our National Guard and Reserve from receiving their GI bill after they have left the military.

This amendment, which I am proud to introduce, will express the sense of Congress that we need to lengthen the period of time that Guard and Reserve members have to take advantage of the GI bill. Once they return home they would have up to 10 years to complete their education.

We owe it to our National Guard and Reserve members to have this time. They are very busy in war right now, and they are having a difficult time

completing their degrees. How can we expect them to fight the battles and simultaneously pursue a degree?

Many of us know someone who's in the National Guard or Reserve and they're playing an ever increasing role in combat operations. We salute their service, and offering them the additional time to obtain their educational goals is a benefit that we should show them that we do appreciate all their efforts.

Now, we must think of the future of our Armed Forces. It really has saddened me to learn that the National Guard and Reserves has missed the recruitment goals for both 2005 and 2006. We know that the military does provide immense benefits to those that sign up, but it cuts off the Guard and Reserve when it comes to educational benefits. What better way to ensure our military remains an all volunteer force by encouraging more people to join?

Taking care of our troops and making education affordable are two of my top priorities in Congress. As a former professor at Penn State, I understand the value of an education, and believe that an educated work force is a better work force for all America. Extending the education benefit to our National Guard and Reserves will do just that.

Our troops are serving their country honorably, and the Guard and Reserve should have access to the higher education when they are finished. We owe it to our troops and to our families back home.

I urge all Members of Congress who care about our troops and the military families to vote in favor of this amendment.

I'd like to thank Chairman Skelton for his work on this issue. He is truly a champion for our veterans and our military families.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 200th anniversary of the Paupack United Methodist Church. The Paupack United Methodist Church in Paupack, Pennsylvania is a long- standing institution and contributor to our community.

Originally founded in 1807 as the Paupack Methodist Episcopal Church, they will celebrate their 200th anniversary in July. The church was founded after the first American Methodist Bishop, Francis Asbury, sent a

horse-riding preacher, Gideon Draper, on the Wyoming-Minisink Trail.

Reverend Draper's readings from the Methodist Discipline of that time inspired the people of Paupack to accept those disciplines as organizing principles and to form a church. Originally, the church met in members' homes and in local schoolhouses. In 1906, the newly formed Ladies' Aid Society began construction on a church.

For 200 years, this congregation has persevered in preserving their faith and their Church. They credit the dedicated service of the laity and the faithful preaching of the clergy for this tremendous accomplishment.

In closing, Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing the Paupack United Methodist Church for their 200 years of distinguished service to Paupack, Pennsylvania and the United States of America.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Lackawanna Historical Society and their commitment to celebrating the coal-mining heritage of Pennsylvania.

The Lackawanna Historical Society is proud to be partners with the Olyphant Coal Miners Association in a visionary project to celebrate the heritage of coal miners in Pennsylvania. On Father's Day, June 17, 2007, they will unveil a monument to honor the mid-valley miners who worked to fuel the world's energy supply in Olyphant collieries.

These dedicated individuals worked to supply anthracite coal and energy to others. In doing so, some lost their lives. It is fitting that we remember their sacrifice, and this monument is a just and proper way to do so.

The monument will feature a bronze statue with a stainless steel pick, crafted by local sculptor Frank ``Wyso'' Wysochansky. The monument will be placed in Olyphant. This is an appropriate place to honor all miners from the Mid-Valley due to its central location. This memorial will remind everyone of the dedication and sacrifice of the coal miners of Mid-Valley, Pennsylvania.

In closing, Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing the Lackawanna Historical Society and the Olyphant Coal Miners Association, and all the citizens of Pennsylvania who lost their lives helping to fuel the world's energy supply.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the SCHIP, the State Children's Health Insurance Program.

My home State of Pennsylvania is a model for this widely successful program. Our distinguished former Governor, the late Robert P. Casey, knew how important it was for Pennsylvania's children to have access to quality, affordable health care.

By meeting the health care needs of our children, we are better preparing them to be healthy adults. Numerous studies have shown that children with health insurance perform better in school and have higher attendance rates. Every child deserves a chance to grow up healthy and strong.

As the proud father of five, I know personally how important it is to have access to doctors, pharmacists and hospitals that your family can trust. Unfortunately, not all families have this security. Children without insurance are sometimes forced to delay treatment or put off preventive care entirely.

Our working families deserve better quality health care for their children. This is not a partisan issue. Rather, providing our children with health care should be a top priority for this Congress. Since its enactment in 1997, SCHIP has been enormously successful in reducing the number of uninsured children across the country.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Lewis for his leadership on this very important bill that we are discussing today.

I rise today in support of the Taxpayer Protection Act of 2007. I have spent the last 2 weeks in northeast and central Pennsylvania hearing from families in my district about matters

that concern them, and one thing was consistent. Our middle-class families deserve a tax cut and tax protection.

It is time to start protecting our taxpayers, Mr. Speaker. This bipartisan legislation will do just that. This legislation requires the IRS to notify taxpayers if there has been an unauthorized use of their identity. This is a serious issue, and the IRS must be actively contacting those individuals who may have fallen victim to identity theft.

This bill protects those who would receive a tax break, also. It requires the IRS to notify those who would be eligible for a tax break. For example, it requires the IRS to conduct additional earned income tax credit outreach, including notifying those who are eligible about how to apply for it.

The Taxpayer Protection Act supports small, family-owned businesses and allows for spouses of the family-owned business to pay Social Security and Medicare taxes as a sole proprietorship rather than as a partnership. This will save our small businesses money, promoting investment and growth in our communities.

I came to Congress to stand up for working families, both in my State, Pennsylvania, and this country. This bipartisan bill protects taxpayers, protects families and protects individuals; and I am proud to support it today.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to mention our condolences for those at Virginia Tech University. I think today everybody in this country is a Hokie.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 100th anniversary of the Susquehanna County Historical Society and Free Library Association. The Susquehanna County Historical Society and Free Library serve all of Susquehanna County, providing books, services, education, and historical information to all of the residents of Susquehanna County.

The Cope family of Philadelphia and Dimock had expressed interest in the founding of a free public library, and working with the Historical Society, in 1907 merged to better serve the people of Susquehanna County. The Historical Society and Library headquarters were opened in 1907 at the corner of Monument Square and Maple Street in Montrose. The building was expanded in 1957, adding a museum space and a Children's room. In the first year of the Library's operation, circulation was almost 14,000, and last year in 2006, circulation was a quarter of a million.

The Library now serves as a headquarters for the county library system. Three other locations throughout the county also offer books, CD's, videos, computers and internet access, and other services and materials to all of Susquehanna County. The access is not limited to those who are able to visit the library, but all inhabitants of Susquehanna County. Programs such as Books-by-Mail, Books-on-Wheels and Books for the Blind allow books to reach residents throughout the county. Outreach librarians bring collections of books and other items to deposit stations, as well as throughout the county to classrooms, day cares, nursing homes, and preschools.

The Historical Society and Museum, founded by W.C. Cruser, occupies the top floor of the Montrose building. The Museum charges no admission and draws thousands of visitors every year from throughout Susquehanna County. Described as a ``jewel of the county,'' the museum's incredible collections of art, toys, photographs, tools, clothing, weapons, and other artifacts serve as a testament to the history of Susquehanna County.

In closing, madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing the Susquehanna County Historical Society and Free Library Association for their 100 years of distinguished service to Susquehanna County and the United States of America.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to salute the Pennsylvania National Guard, in particular the Stryker Brigade Combat Team. Fielding the Stryker Brigade has been the largest program undertaken by the Pennsylvania National Guard in modern history.

The Stryker Brigade Combat Team is a combat force that provides division, corps, or joint task force commanders a unique capability across the full range of operations.

On this upcoming district work period, I will be visiting Fort Indiantown Gap, Pennsylvania, to have an opportunity to tour their Stryker program. The Stryker is a survivable and sustainable method of troop transportation. It can take soldiers safely into a range of environments, from war to humanitarian assistance. We must do everything we can to defend our troops from harm, and the Stryker provides that protection.

Pennsylvania has the largest Army National Guard in the United States, with the 28th Infantry Division being the premier division with a large number of soldiers in a high state of readiness.

I commend the Stryker Brigade Combat Team and the entire Pennsylvania National Guard for their fine service to our country and representing Pennsylvania with honor.

Madam Speaker, as chairman of the Homeland Security Committee's Subcommittee on Management, Investigations and Oversight, I am very concerned with the potential for waste, fraud and abuse at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

As we have heard all too often in recent months, the Department is spending increasing amounts of its resources on outside contractors to help fulfill its job of preparing, preventing and mitigating any future large-scale catastrophic events on our soil.

Unfortunately, the contracts are numerous, as are the dollars being doled out. Congress

has discovered that, government-wide, Federal agencies have had help developing requests for proposals (RFPs) for any number of goods and services from industry insiders, all in the interest of expediency.

While it is certainly reasonable for the government to consult with industry insiders during RFP development, it is deplorable for these industry insiders to make recommendations to the government that would result in only one selectable proposal: that from the company of the insider who assisted with the initial RFP.

Such action is wrong, yet it has happened on numerous occasions.

For example, starting in late 2003, DHS issued an RFP for ``eMerge2,'' an effort to finish the consolidation of all of the financial systems of the DHS components into one new system. The eMerge2 RFP was drafted in large part by a single contractor. When the contract was awarded, it was split between two contractors, one of them being the company that helped write the RFP. Long story short: eMerge2 was a failure.

The questions raised by eMerge2 run deeper than ``just'' the federal dollars that were doled out without seeing any return. Indeed, the eMerge2 fiasco raised serious questions about whether more needs to be done, both by DHS and by contractors, to ensure that the ``firewalls'' contractors are using are actually working. This legislation answers some of those questions.

Similarly, when the Coast Guard (USCG) realized that the majority of its marine and aviation fleet was in desperate need of upgrade, it relied upon only two contractors to design the entire Deepwater project, without nearly enough consultation from USCG personnel. Now the Coast Guard has had to pull ships from service and is borrowing boats from the Navy. Our waters are less secure now than before 9/11 because of the fiasco that is Deepwater.

Surely, there have been examples of unnecessary government largesse resulting in waste. That said, while private industry as a contracting partner can save taxpayer dollars, I am skeptical that a business that helped to write an RFP and was the only business qualified to receive it really has the taxpayers' best interests in mind. In fact, this type of malfeasance is criminal, in my opinion.

This legislation seeks to eliminate the potential for future abuses of Federal homeland security procurement dollars. It would require that any contract entered into after May 1, 2007 is not awarded to companies who played a role in constructing the RFP for said contract. If the company is awarded the contract, the Secretary of Homeland Security must certify to Congress that the contract was issued through a competitive process and that DHS took all appropriate measures to ensure that during the RFP design stage, any potential contractor could not influence the RFP to favor itself. Additionally, it would allow for contractors who had input in the process to be hired as subcontractors if they had input designing the RFP but were not ultimately selected as the lead contractor.

I would encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting this necessary legislation, which has the potential to save the Federal Government hundreds of millions of dollars, if not more annually. The financial resources of the Federal Government are limited. It should not be as easy as it currently is to game the system and bilk tens of millions of dollars at a time out the Department of Homeland Security's budget.

Madam Speaker, I am here today to ask for the resignation of U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

I came to Congress with a pledge to bring back accountability to our Federal Government. Attorney General Gonzales has put his political agenda over the needs of our Justice Department. It is time for real oversight on these issues, and it begins by calling for Mr. Gonzales' resignation.

I am disgusted that this administration is more concerned about protecting themselves rather than the American people. We need unbiased, honorable men and women representing our country in this judicial system, not political favors or handouts.

We need a full investigation into the allegations of the plan to remove U.S. Attorneys from their posts anytime they defect from the administration's political agenda. This week, the Justice Department released thousands of pages of e-mails and internal documents related to the U.S. Attorney scandal. The documents are still under review, but it is clear that congressional oversight is needed so we can prosecute offenders.

The House Judiciary Committee is continuing its investigation into this serious matter, and I will continue to fight to ensure that U.S. Attorneys are free from political pressure and have the tools they need to prosecute criminals.

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

Mr. Chairman, I would like to commend Chairman Waxman, Chairman Thompson, and others for their work on this long overdue and sorely needed bill.

As chairman of the Homeland Security Subcommittee on Management, Investigations, and Oversight, I have a vested interest in H.R. 985's passage. I would like to thank Chairman Thompson for allowing me to manage our committee's allotted time on the bill.

This bill extends whistleblower protections to Federal employees who work on national security mainly in the intelligence area and workers in the Transportation Security Administration, especially screeners, as well as to Federal contractors.

As Chairman Waxman and others have noted, there is a tremendous need to extend whistleblower protections for Federal workers or contractors, our best sources for shining light on waste, fraud, and abuse.

This bill treats transportation security officers, or TSOs, sometimes called ``screeners,'' the same as all other Department of Homeland Security employees by giving them full whistleblower protections, which TSOs currently do not have.

Mr. Chairman, others will tell you that TSOs have whistleblower rights. This is debatably true on paper, but it has not been true in practice.

The truth is, TSOs do not enjoy full whistleblower protections. TSOs have limited whistleblower protections that come from a memorandum of understanding, or MOU, that was entered into when the TSA was still part of the Department of Transportation. Under the MOU, TSOs, transportation screeners, can only bring a claim to the Office of Special Counsel. They do not have a right of appeal or independent review by another agency or court.

In 2004, while reviewing a TSO whistleblower claim in the case of Schott v. The Department of Homeland Security, the Merit Systems Protection Board, MSPB, ruled that the Homeland Security Act does not provide TSOs with the right to MSPB review. Other DHS employees enjoy the right to MSPB review.

Thus, as you can see, Mr. Chairman, the TSOs are currently treated differently than other DHS personnel, including their fellow employees within TSA.

This bill allows a whistleblower to go to court if their claim has not been acted upon within 6 months. This bill permits the whistleblower to bring an appeal on their case to any Federal Court of Appeals having proper jurisdiction over the case, not just the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, as the law now stands.

I am also pleased that this bill provides the same rights to the Office of Intelligence and Analysis employees at DHS as it does to intelligence employees in other agencies. As we know, whistleblowers in the intelligence community must be careful when they disclose certain information. This bill helps govern how these intelligence-related employees bring their claims while also adequately protecting any sensitive or classified information that may be involved with their claims.

Mr. Chairman, I want to note that H.R. 1, which passed the House in January, tries to fix TSA's poor morale problem by giving TSOs whistleblower rights and collective bargaining rights. The collective bargaining rights are comparable to other law enforcement officers and others within the DHS, such as Border Patrol and CBP officers.

Mr. Chairman, I am happy to vote for this bill as it not only makes America safer and more secure, but it also allows for all employees to report waste, fraud, or abuse of our vital and limited government resources.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentlelady from the State of Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).