Floor Statements

I thank the gentleman for yielding to me and hope that what I am about to discuss is supported by the current ranking member.

I rise in strong support of the manager's amendment, which includes two provisions which I authored and which address problems continuing to impede our efforts to keep our country safe.

First, it requires the Inspector General of the intelligence community to report to Congress in 180 days on overclassification of intelligence. Stamping documents ``secret'' or ``top secret'' for the wrong reasons interferes with accurate, actionable, and timely information sharing within the Federal Government and with State and local law enforcement. Protecting sources and methods is the right reason to classify information, but protecting turf or personal embarrassment is not.

D.C. Police Chief Cathy Lanier says she hesitates to share information with the Federal Government for fear it will be immediately classified and rendered useless because she can't tell her officers in the field what to look for when on patrol. A variety of civil liberties and good government groups support our amendment, and I am glad it's in the manager's amendment.

Second, Madam Chair, the manager's amendment requires the Director of National Intelligence, in consultation with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, to assess intelligence on harmful radiological materials, including highly disbursable substances like Cesium-137. It's not possible in this open setting to describe the threat posed by unsecured radiological materials, but a range of experts, including the Defense Science Board, have warned about the danger posed by medical equipment that uses this material.

These machines are in hospitals across the country, in every major town and city. They are not tamper-proof. The Departments of Energy and Homeland Security are adding short-term hardening measures to these machines, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is investigating alternatives. They need more support.

My thanks to the Rules Committee and to Chairman Reyes for including my provisions in the manager's amendment. I am very pleased that after 4 long years we will probably pass an intelligence authorization bill today. I urge an ``aye'' vote.

I thank the chairman for yielding, and surely hope that we will accept his amendment. I recall during my years as ranking member on the committee when we were, in quotes, ``briefed'' on this incident. I am very disappointed about the way it was handled. I personally think the gentleman from Michigan is correct, and I applaud what he is doing.

As we debate this bill, we must thank again the thousands of patriotic and courageous women and men who are serving in our intelligence community around the world. As I so often say, a grateful Nation salutes them for their efforts to keep us safe. Our Nation also remembers and honors those who lost their lives, most recently at Forward Operating Base Chapman in Afghanistan.

Madam Chair, in addition to this excellent amendment, I applaud the underlying bill's provisions to reform the way Congress is notified of sensitive covert programs, briefings that for too long were limited to the so-called ``Gang of Eight.'' During my years as ranking member, it was clear that effective oversight required providing the entire committee with information previously limited to its leadership. And so this bill rightly provides for full committee notice of Gang of Eight briefings, a contemporaneous record of those briefings, something we sorely lacked, and it entitles the full committee to receive the same briefings as the Gang of Eight within 180 days.

These changes go a long way toward correcting the frustration felt on both sides of the aisle during my tenure on the committee. We should not have been put in the position of on the one hand upholding our oath of secrecy, while on the other hand being starved for information to conduct necessary oversight.

Just last week, pursuant to a FOIA request, memoranda describing some of our briefings were declassified. The documents, which are available to the public, show repeated pushback from Intelligence Committee members, surely including me, about the failure to brief us or to provide documents or other timely information.

Madam Chair, last time I checked, Congress was an independent branch of government. We must assert our prerogative to monitor and rectify problems that surface in the programs we oversee. In the intelligence world, some of these problems affect our core values as well as our Constitution. Security and liberty are not a zero sum game. It is our sworn duty to protect both. The language in the underlying bill and this amendment offered by Mr. Hoekstra go a long way to rectify long- existing problems.

I urge support for the bill and support for this amendment.

I thank Mr. Conyers for yielding and commend him for his leadership of the Judiciary Committee. He has authored many bills which I am proud to cosponsor, one of which includes amendments to these three expiring provisions of the PATRIOT Act.

I rise today because I think we are missing an opportunity. There are good ideas in this House about how to curb the abuses with national security letters, how to clarify that roving wiretaps are limited to a single identifiable target, and how to eliminate the lone wolf provision which has never been used and for which existing title III authority can suffice. Those ideas have been the subject of hearings in the Judiciary Committee, but they're not being debated on this floor.

Instead, we hear that the only way to protect America is to extend the PATRIOT Act as is for another year. We could have extended it for a shorter period and fully debated how to amend the PATRIOT Act on this floor. I think this is a real missed opportunity. As one who was here when we first passed The PATRIOT Act, I recognize that my approach has been controversial.

I am one of very few Members who opposed initially rolling back the so-called library provision, which I agree was an overreach in the initial PATRIOT Act. But I opposed rolling it back because the amendment as initially drafted included eliminating access to Internet sites at libraries. And as one who studies the terrorism threat carefully, I know that terrorists use the Internet frequently as a way to communicate. So when the library provision was finally drafted to exclude Internet sites, I proudly voted for it.

The PATRIOT Act is a valuable tool. Those who have spoken on the other side are right, we need it. But we have enough knowledge in this House to tweak it to be much more fair to innocent Americans who have inadvertently been caught up in its web.

Let me also mention that under the Intelligence Reform Act of 2004, we required that the White House establish a privacy and civil liberties commission to oversee the development and implementation of laws with respect to terrorism. That commission was never fully established in the last administration, and this administration has yet to name a chairman and a vice chairman.

I urge the President again to fully implement the provisions of the 2004 Intelligence Reform Act. Standing up that commission would send a message that we can protect our security, but we can also protect our liberty. This is not a zero-sum game.

And let me finally address something we will hear as we close debate on the Intelligence authorization bill, and that is a view by some that we should bar trials or terrorist suspects in Article III courts.

The prior administration tried virtually everyone charged with terrorism-related crimes in Federal court. Most of those people were convicted and are now incarcerated. There was a 90 percent conviction rate over hundreds of trials since 9/11. In contrast, military commissions convicted three people, two of whom are no longer serving.

So if you just look at the conviction rate, we are safer if we use article III courts.

In a letter from Secretary Gates and Attorney General Holder dated today to the leadership, they express their opposition to any legislation or amendments that would restrict the ability of the executive branch to effectively prosecute alleged terrorists in Federal courts or reformed military commissions in the United States.

Their point, and my point, is we can have reformed military commissions--

and I know that the President and many here are considering reforms which I may support--but we also must permit robust use of our Federal courts. I think it's disingenuous to claim that after 300 people have been sent to jail for long sentences, we can't safely try terrorists in U.S. courts under Federal law. I agree with Secretary of Defense Gates and Attorney General Holder that such an amendment would make us less safe by removing a critical tool from the Nation's arsenal, and that's the use of our Federal justice system.

In conclusion, we must live our values. When we fail to do that, we offer a huge recruiting tool to those who would attack us. If we live our values by carefully amending expiring PATRIOT Act provisions, by standing up a privacy and civil liberties board and by saying that Federal Courts can try many of those we apprehend for terrorism-related crimes, we have the best chance of winning in this era of terror.

Madam Speaker, I take a backseat to no one in the effort to defeat the terror threat against us. I take the threat very seriously. I read proposed legislation carefully. Today, we could have, as Mr. Nadler suggested, passed a short-term extension and then had a robust public debate about amendments to expiring PATRIOT Act provisions. This is a missed opportunity and I oppose the extension.

Madam Speaker, Jack Murtha was a paradox: a big man with an impressive war record who never wavered from his commitment to the wounded, the disadvantaged, and always challenged those who, in his strong opinion, underestimated the economic and human costs of war. He was a politician who constantly spoke his mind, and never worried about ruffling feathers. That's rare in today's Washington. Jack reached out to his colleagues--not just those who sat near him in the ``Pennsylvania corner'' on the House floor, but to others whom he respected. The people of California's 36th District and I are lucky to have been one of those he looked out for. I remember his visit about a decade ago to the Los Angeles Air Force Base Space and Missile Systems Center, located in my Congressional district. Of course he cared about SMC's mission of development and acquisition of our nation's defense satellites, he also wanted to know about the people of SMC. He met with the generals and staff about how things were going, and whether funding was on track, but he also took the time to speak at a ``town hall'' style meeting with the workforce where he thanked them for their service and to check on their well-being. They will miss him. So will I. I hope Joyce and his family are comforted by how big the big man's impact was.

I thank Chairman Reyes for yielding to me and for the nice things that he says not only about me but surely about the women and men who serve our intelligence community around the world. And I thank him for authoring this resolution.

Madam Speaker, every single time I enter CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, the first thing I do is to look at the wall of stars displayed in the lobby, each star, as we just heard, signifying a loss somewhere in the world of an agency employee. Some of those stars have no names attached, underscoring the sensitivity and singular importance of the missions undertaken by CIA women and men. On my most recent visit to Langley, in late December, I asked my host if any new stars had been added to the wall. Yes, he said, simply. Sadly, the next time I or anyone else enters CIA headquarters, seven more stars will be on that wall, stars honoring patriots I probably met on one of my many trips that I made as ranking member of the Intelligence Committee, and more recently as chair of the Homeland Security Subcommittee on Intelligence.

On those trips I always meet with our intelligence officers to hear firsthand about their work and to thank them for their service and sacrifice. When a suicide bomber took those seven lives at Forward Operating Base Chapman, Americans got a rare glimpse of the dangerous reality that our intelligence community faces on a daily basis. There is no question, Madam Speaker, that their work has saved and will continue to save American lives.

So on behalf of a grateful Nation, our profound gratitude goes to the families of Harold Brown, Elizabeth Hanson, Dane Paresi, Scott Roberson, and Jeremy Wise, and to those of two others whose names are not disclosed. We also salute those who were wounded in the attack and their families.

Madam Speaker, accurate, actionable, and timely intelligence is America's first line of defense, the so-called tip of the spear.

These intelligence professionals died in an effort to penetrate the top leadership of al Qaeda. I believe that the best way to honor them is by supporting their colleagues, who continue to put their lives on the line in the service of the American people and defense of our Nation. Let us do so this afternoon by supporting this bipartisan resolution.

Madam Speaker, the post- 9/11 world has posed many challenges--especially to the old way of doing business. Someone who stepped up and used his military training and experience to transform airport security was David Stone. David died unexpectedly earlier last month, at age 57, and I rise to commemorate my friend and his exceptional career.

Admiral Stone was selected as the first federal security director at LAX--the top terror target on the West Coast--shortly after 9/11. He proved more than equal to the task. Working under immense pressure and close public scrutiny, Stone established strict new federal airport security standards, secured nearly $1 billion in federal funding for security upgrades and positioned LAX to become a test site for new security technologies that are now used around the world.

The Bush administration noticed and Stone was asked to apply his talents at the national level. As the Nation's third TSA administrator, he was charged with overseeing security at not just one airport--but all of them, in addition to ports, railroads, and pipelines. In just 2 years, he shaped the role of the TSA for years to come.

When Stone left the TSA it marked a culmination of more than three decades of national service. He was a decorated soldier, a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy who rose to rank of Rear Admiral. During his 28- year military career he commanded warships, vessel fleets, NATO naval forces, and an aircraft carrier battle group. For his valor he received three Legions of Merit, five Meritorious Service medals, and three Navy Commendation medals.

A lovely memory is how David spoke to high school seniors in my district who were applying to the military academies. He was so excited about them--and recalled his own journey decades earlier. David Stone also shared this excitement and talent with a grateful nation. He is fondly remembered.

Let me first commend Mrs. Capps, who, as a registered nurse, has brought so much understanding and depth to our ongoing negotiations on health care in the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Second, let me commend a good friend and frequent partner, Mr. Royce, whose focus on this issue and personal compassion on behalf of his friend, Abby, and enormously caring staff, have brought this issue to my attention.

It resonates in my California congressional district, where there is an incredible community of activists who are committed to increasing awareness and supporting research on Prader-Willi syndrome. Two of those activists, Tom and Renay Compere, are parents of a child with PWS. They have brought other Prader-Willi families together with groups of students, teachers, and other members of the community to spread awareness and raise funds to combat this devastating disease.

Tom Compere says, ``The thing that has kept us going over the years has been the optimism that a cure for PWS will be found and that our son will have a normal life. What a concept. A normal life was something, until recently, that I took for granted.''

That's the goal of this resolution. By increasing awareness and promoting research at the national level, we can give the Compere family and thousands of families like them a chance to lead a normal life.

Two years ago, Mr. Speaker, I attended the annual walkathon for Prader-Willi research in Mar Vista, a wonderful community in my district. The warmth and excitement of the children I met there was touching, especially in the face of the challenges they face on a daily basis.

Prader-Willi patients suffer, as you have heard, from cognitive disabilities, poor muscle tone, and constant feelings of hunger. They often look different from other children, which makes it difficult to fit in or be accepted as a normal kid. Some cutting-edge treatments, like the ones Abby received, can improve the physical development of children with Prader-Willi so they can fit in, but this is contingent on early diagnosis and treatment, and that often doesn't happen.

By passing H. Res. 55 and raising the profile of this disease, this House can give these children better odds at doing something most of us take for granted: Living a normal life.

I urge passage of the resolution and again commend my friends from California for their role.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize a man of many abilities and talents, whose contributions to the City of Hermosa Beach enriched his community and contributed to the economic health of the region for the past 16 years.

A South Bay resident since childhood, my good friend and City Councilman J.R. Reviczky enlisted in the U.S. Naval Reserve after graduating from Bishop Montgomery High School in Torrance, California, also in my Congressional District. Following an honorable discharge from the Naval Reserve, he embarked on a career as an electrician. During his 37-year career, he worked his way up the ranks from apprentice to his current role as Training Director for one of the largest electrical contractors in the United States.

J.R. was first elected to the Hermosa Beach City Council in 1993, and has served four distinguished terms as Mayor. His lasting mark can be seen throughout the community. As a member of the Open Space People's Action Committee, he was instrumental in the development of Hermosa Beach's many acres of beautiful parks and recreation facilities, including the conversion of railways into a community treasure known as the Greenbelt. He was also one of the co-founders of the Beach Cities Holiday Toy Drive which, for the past 15 years, has collected and distributed thousands of toys to needy children throughout the 36th Congressional District and beyond.

I have personally benefited from J.R.'s counsel and encyclopedic knowledge of local issues and history.

On behalf of a grateful community, I thank Councilman J.R. Reviczky for his dedicated service to the people of Hermosa Beach and wish him continued success as he and his wife, Nancy, begin the next chapter of their life.

Mr. Speaker, because it eliminates cost sharing and makes access to health care more affordable, as a mother of four and a grandmother of three, I ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks in support of the Democratic bill.

Mr. Speaker, It is going to be very difficult for me to vote for a health care bill that contains the Stupak amendment on abortion.

Far from codifying the Hyde language, which has been included in House appropriations bills since 1976, the Stupak amendment would essentially make it impossible for most women to use their own funds to purchase insurance to pay for abortions. This is not chipping away at a woman's right to choose, this is an outright assault on my constitutional rights--and it is wrong.

I respect the right of any woman or man to oppose abortion. But, in return, I expect those who are anti-choice to respect my views. My views are that abortion should be safe and rare--but that a woman's constitutional right to privacy as articulated in Roe v. Wade is inviolable.

I am old enough to remember the days of back alley abortions. Some women I know had them. I cannot bear the idea that the 111th Congress would restore that horror.

The Stupak amendment is insulting and destructive. Its passage would pair us with the government of Afghanistan in sending women's rights back to the Stone Age. I intend to vote for this bill, but if it contains the Stupak amendment when it emerges from Conference Committee, my conscience demands that I reconsider my support.

Madam Speaker, every community across America has its local icons--women and men whose dedication and commitment to service improve our quality of life and strengthen the bonds between us-- regardless of party affiliation. Bob Beverly, who recently passed away, was such a man. He was also a friend and a veteran legislator in the South Bay, the region of Los Angeles which I represent.

Before Bob made his way to Los Angeles, he served in the Marine Corps during World War II. Following the war, Bob moved to Manhattan Beach where he became Mayor and served for three terms. But more than half of Bob's time in public service--in fact almost a quarter of his life--was spent representing the South Bay as its longest-serving state legislator.

Many people know Bob Beverly for his service as Minority Leader in the State Senate during Ronald Reagan's tenure as Governor. In that role, he left a profound and permanent impact on countless lives throughout the South Bay.

Bob was an enormously popular, responsive and effective leader. His career overlapped with legendary Los Angeles Congressman Alphonzo Bell, who pursued a similar style of bipartisan leadership. Such comity--and a willingness to reach across the aisle--has become all too rare in Washington. But I continue to believe it is a critical element when confronting our toughest problems.

I am proud to have worked early in my Congressional career with Bob on issues of importance to the South Bay. His humility and quiet commitment to issues affecting his constituents will be missed--and not forgotten.

Thank you, Mr. Pallone, for yielding time to me to speak on this bill and on the bill that was just considered.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be a member of the Health Subcommittee of the Energy and Commerce Committee. I regret the fact that it has taken us so many months to get to a place where we are almost ready to consider comprehensive health care reform. I strongly support it, especially with a robust public option. Yet this is a good day because, today we will pass a more limited bill that identified a huge problem, metastatic breast cancer.

I have been fortunate not to have cancer, but there are many cancer survivors in this body, some of whom have survived breast cancer. I am the sister of Dr. David Lakes, who is an oncologist in Northern California and who was voted Healer of the Year in Marin County for the work he has done with those who suffer from metastatic breast cancer. I am very proud of him.

I am very proud of the sponsors of this legislation, who understand how critical it is not just to focus on the fact of this disease, but, as Ms. DeLauro said a few minutes ago, on how to make it a chronic disease and not a killer. So I strongly support this legislation.

As the author of Legislation to extend the PSIC Grant Program, the Public Safety Interoperable Communications Grant Program, which was debated just moments ago, I urge us to continue the program which provides $1 billion in grants to State and local governments for interoperable communications systems, which, obviously, will be needed in the event of the next terrorist attack or natural disaster.

Eight years after 9/11, we have not fixed one of the two major problems on that day. One problem was that we failed to connect the dots. The other was that we could not communicate in realtime among our first responders to the catastrophe both in New York and in Washington. Nationally, we still lack an interoperable communications network. That will require more work by Congress and the FCC to build out the now vacant 700 megahertz analog spectrum so that, nationally, all of our first preventers, or responders, can communicate.

In the meantime, it is significant that our communities will be able to access additional Federal funds because of the action recommended moments ago to pass S. 1694 which is identical to H.R. 3633--an action that means the bill will become law.

Let me finally say that the PSIC extension legislation is supported by the major city police chiefs, the National Governors Association, the National Emergency Management Association, the Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials, the Telecommunications Industry Association, mayors in Los Angeles, New York and Houston, the Los Angeles County Sheriff--Lee Baca--and many others because they know that having interoperable communications in our cities and regions is critical.

Just as metastatic breast cancer is an emergency that we must deal with, so is the lack of a truly national interoperable communications capability. We took a big step this morning. I hope we will take a bigger step later this year.

I thank Chairman Pallone for the work that he does on the Health Subcommittee. I am proud to be a member.

Madam Speaker, I rise to recognize the achievements of South Bay Family Health Care on the 40th Anniversary of its founding. Since 1969, SBFHC has provided health care to underserved residents in the South Bay region of my Congressional District, growing from a single-site family planning clinic serving 1,600 patients per year, to a system of four comprehensive health clinics serving more than 16,000 patients per year. Today, it is one of Los Angeles County's leading community health clinics and largest safety net providers to the uninsured and underinsured.

SBFHC has evolved and adapted to meet changing community needs. In the mid-1980s, in response to the emerging HIV/AIDS crisis, it opened the first and only HIV/AIDS center in the South Bay. In 2002, it changed its model from a free clinic to a Federally Qualified Health Center with a sliding pay scale, making the clinic eligible for federal funding to expand its services and the number of people served.

Today, with a budget of $9 million, SBFHC provides 70,000 visits per year. Its services cover a broad spectrum, covering preventative care, chronic disease management, prenatal and pediatric medicine, dental care, and social services including mental health and domestic violence prevention.

In an effort to bring service to patients, SBFHC sponsors a ``Healthy Kids Express'' mobile care center that provides immunizations and care for sick children at local school districts, community events and health fairs.

SBFHC also does fantastic work for minorities: 65 percent of their patients are Latino and 16 percent are African-American.

I also want to recognize the CEO of SBFHC, Jann Hamilton Lee, for her leadership and guidance to me as a member of my Medicine Cabinet--a bipartisan group of healthcare experts from my district who advise me on health policy.

My congratulations to Jann and everyone else who has proudly served the South Bay Family Health Center for 40 years of service. The residents of the South Bay--and your representative in Congress--are grateful.

Mr. Chair, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3585, the Solar Technology Roadmap Act. Advancing solar technology is vital to our Nation's energy security, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and establishing the United States as a leader in green technology. This bill will create a structured plan for pursuing solar research, development and demonstration, and will foster new public-private partnerships to make clean, renewable energy more affordable and accessible for all Americans.

Solar power can help reduce greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate the effects of climate change. My home State of California is ahead of the curve: 67 percent of the United States total solar generation is in California.

The Fortunato family in Hermosa Beach, a city I represent, is retrofitting their home to be the city's first ``net zero'' home and to power all their electricity needs through renewables--mostly through the use of solar panels for electricity and solar hot water for heating.

In fact, throughout California's 36th Congressional District, my constituents are turning to solar energy as they continue the region's tradition of environmental leadership. Large installations at Harbor City College in Wilmington, BT telecommunications in El Segundo, and the Port of Los Angeles are setting the standard for solar excellence in the South Bay. At BT, flexible solar panels provide shade in the outdoor parking lot--something that could be widely copied. My family installed solar panels on our roof in Venice, California, over 8 years ago.

I worked for President Jimmy Carter, who in 1979 mandated that by the year 2000, 20 percent of power generated in the United States should come from the Sun. Three decades later, we're still far from that visionary goal. Solar power accounts for just 1.2 percent of the U.S. mix. We can--and must--do far better.

I thank my friend and colleague for yielding and rise in support of the rule and the underlying bill.

Mr. Speaker, a few years ago, Senator Susan Collins and I toured the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach.

Mindful of the assault on the USS Cole, during a security briefing with the Coast Guard, I asked what sort of protections were in place to defend against threats from small boats. The response made my jaw drop. We were told that small boats were advised to observe a 100-foot security perimeter around large ships--as if an imaginary ``Do Not Cross'' sign would deter terrorists bent on mimicking the USS Cole attack and blowing themselves up.

Clearly, small boats continue to pose a critical security risk and deserve serious attention. The manager's amendment to the underlying bill contains a provision which I authored requiring the Coast Guard to conduct a study assessing whether transponders--such as radio frequency ID tags--on small boats can effectively mitigate the threat of small boat attacks in major ports. Such a system already exists in Singapore, and Coast Guard Commandant Thad Allen has suggested it may work in the United States. Transponders are not the only way to address the small boat threat and they may not be the best, but they have the potential to greatly increase situational awareness in U.S. ports.

Beyond the small boats provision, this bill contains two other measures I believe are critical. One is a requirement for an Inspector General's report evaluating port operation centers' relationships with State, local, and regional fusion centers. The other is a requirement for DHS to conduct a review of the potential consequences of an attack on a gasoline or chemical cargo ship in one of America's ports.

I thank Chairman Oberstar for including my small boats provision, and I thank the Rules Committee, especially my California colleague and friend, Ms. Matsui, for bringing this bill to the floor.

Vote ``aye'' on the rule and the underlying legislation.

Madam Speaker, eight years after 9/11, there remains a very real, very serious threat of another attack on U.S. soil. The recent series of arrests--in Dallas, Chicago, Denver and New York City--underscores the need for continued resolve. The safety of the American people relies upon multiple layers of security--from intelligence to local police to the technologies that help us identify potential threats. Our duty as lawmakers is to ensure that all of these pieces are properly in place and constantly reevaluated.

A New York Times report this week highlighted a gaping hole in one of these layers--we still have no system in place to verify whether foreign visitors have left this country. Congress and DHS have known about this hole. In March, Secretary Napolitano joined me for a tour of one of the nation's top airport terror targets: Los Angeles International Airport, part of which is in my Congressional District. We walked through customs to observe the collection of foreign visitors' fingerprints upon entry and I pointed out the absence of an exit program. Secretary Napolitano committed her Department to addressing this issue in a timely fashion.

Work is already underway. DHS just completed a pilot project to test exit systems and will soon release a report on their findings. This bill provides $50 million to put an air exit system in place. It is imperative that DHS do so.

By collecting fingerprints when foreign passengers exit, we can match them with those collected upon entry and cross-check them with a range of databases--from the State Department to the FBI. This isn't just data for the sake of data. It builds situational awareness and makes it easier for terrorism investigators to connect the ``dots.'' This kind of capability is a vital tool in the ongoing struggle to prevent the next attack on American soil.

It's true that our intelligence and law enforcement agencies successfully thwarted recent plots, but that's no guarantee that they'll detect the next plot. A biometric system will provide them with better information that can more quickly identify potential threats. Four of the 9/11 hijackers overstayed their visas. It is exactly this type of thing that exit data will help us detect.

I would also like to thank the Conferees for including a 1-year waiver of the port security grant matching requirement. Since 2006, the SAFE Port Act has provided hundreds of millions of dollars to secure U.S. ports. But tough financial times--and a decline in shipping--have made it difficult for ports to meet the 25 percent cost-sharing requirement. Officials at the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach have repeatedly told me just how burdensome the requirement is. It creates a disincentive for ports to apply for grants, without which fund vital efforts to mitigate threats cannot be funded.