Appointment of Conferees on H.R. 4567, Department of Homeland Security
APPOINTMENT OF CONFEREES ON H.R. 4567, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2005 -- (House of Representatives - October 07, 2004)
Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 4567) making appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2005, and for other purposes, with a Senate amendment thereto, disagree to the Senate amendment, and agree to the conference asked by the Senate.
(BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT)
Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, the conference report for the fiscal year 2005 Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill, which we will be considering on the House floor soon, will provide $32 billion for the Department of Homeland Security. This funding level is consistent with the subcommittee's spending allocation, and it is $496 million above the amounts proposed by the President and $1.1 billion above fiscal year 2004 enacted levels.
The conference allocation will allow us to aggressively support critical homeland security missions identified in the gentleman's motion, including first responder, domestic preparedness, emergency management, firefighter assistance and disaster mitigation and relief programs.
The motion offered by the gentleman from Minnesota is consistent with my intentions to secure our Nation's homeland by providing the most robust funding possible for all aspects of homeland security: Protection, preparedness and response. But we must do this within our spending allocation.
For the 22 agencies that now make up the new department, Congress has provided more than $73 billion through fiscal 2004. With the additional $32 billion in this bill, the totals provided to the Department is more than $105 billion in fiscal years 2002 through 2005.
Tremendous progress has been made in making our Nation more secure using the right mixture of people and technology to strengthen our borders and close security gaps. Let me give some success stories:
Since its creation, the Department has inventoried the Nation's critical infrastructure to include more than 33,000 facilities and begun identifying and reducing vulnerabilities at chemical plants and facilities, nuclear power plants, national monuments, subway and light rail systems, and commercial sites, among others.
Two, the Department has streamlined the process used to get money out to first responders by setting up a new one-stop shop and eliminating choke points so that money can flow where it is needed more rapidly.
Three, we have enhanced aviation security by searching all checked bags for explosives, modifying airports to install explosive detection machines in-line, improving air cargo security through increased screening and enhancements of the known shipper program, and developing antimissile devices for commercial aircraft.
Four, we have increased the presence of the container security initiative to more than 38 foreign ports which ship us over 80 percent of our container freight, meaning that we are prescreening most high-threat cargo before it ever reaches our shore.
The next point. We have made capital improvements, investments in innovative technologies, including radiation detection for our ports and nonintrusive inspection technologies for cargo screening which are deployed at our busiest land and seaports.
And we have created standards for first responder equipment, established three Homeland Security Centers of Excellence and expanded the presence of sensors in high-risk cities for detailing biohazards.
Those are just some of the accomplishments that we can count on and be thankful for since 9/11.
Mr. Speaker, I support the highest possible funding levels for the critical functions of the Department of Homeland Security. I also believe in the responsible use of taxpayer money. As we move towards conference, my goal is to do all we can to ensure both our Homeland Security operators as well as our first responders get the tools they need to keep our hometowns safe and secure.
I certainly believe in doing all we can to make this country safe, and in that spirit, I accept the gentleman's motion as a good one.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
(BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT)
Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The gentleman from Wisconsin knows that our subcommittee does a lot of closed-door briefings. They are not hearings, they are briefings. They are behind closed doors because we are dealing with classified materials and procedures and practices. Therefore, there is a lot we cannot talk about here in these surroundings. There is a lot going on that we cannot describe. And I really resent those who would take advantage of the fact that we cannot describe all that we are doing to say we are not doing enough.
I resent that. If the gentleman would attend some of those closed briefings, he would know better.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.
Mr. OBEY. I have attended a lot of briefings that I have never seen you at, with the CIA, the Homeland Security Agency, and a number of others.
Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Well, if you would attend one closed Homeland Security briefing, I would appreciate it.
Mr. OBEY. You don't know the briefings I have attended.
Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Reclaiming my time.
Mr. OBEY. Get your facts straight.
Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Reclaiming my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hayes). The gentlemen will direct their comments to the Chair.
Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker.
Suffice it to say on, for example container security, there is a lot more going on than the gentleman has described, or perhaps even knows about. And I would hope that we could keep this discussion based on facts, and based on the fact that we cannot talk about publicly a lot of the classified procedures and operations that are being done and easily demagogued by those who want to buy some political insurance in case we have an unfortunate incident in the future.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
(BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT)
Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I reserve my time.
(BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT)
Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.