Homeland Security

From San Diego, California:

The US/Mexico border in southern California is a study in contrasts. Part of the border is a single, rusted wall of corrugated steel. There are clear signs that illegals have climbed over or dug under this barrier. With more than two million residents of Tijuana, Mexico, just a few hundred yards away, this doesn't appear to be much of a national border. Farther to the east, we got a glimpse of the future: A two-layer border fence with video surveillance towers and a patrol road in the middle. It is an imposing sight and, while not completely secure, the new neighborhoods being built just inside the U.S. border attest to the fact that this border is largely secure.

We spent the day touring border areas, detention centers and the largest port of entry in the United States: southern California's San Diego sector. Different from many other areas of the US/Mexico border, this is an area that has seen real progress in border security over the past ten years. In 1995, more than 500,000 arrests were processed in this sector and, after extensive border and personnel changes, that number has dropped to around 125,000 in 2005.

The success of what CBP called "Operation Gatekeeper" is especially important since San Diego is considered the number one point of entry for criminal aliens on the U.S. border. The terrain, population density and numerous transportation options have made this the most attractive arrival point for aliens with criminal intent. Progress here should mean that our families are safer from criminal aliens but, unfortunately, the U.S. border is more than just San Diego.

The discouraging news is that there is evidence that success here has only driven many of the drug and human traffic activities to less secure areas of the border. Read more...

It is time for the United States and the United Nations to call Iran's bluff and impose strict economic sanctions if Iran refuses to meet an August 31 deadline for suspending its nuclear enrichment program. After 11 weeks of delay, Iran formally responded Tuesday to a United Nations incentives package aimed at persuading Tehran to suspend uranium enrichment.  Iranian officials offered what they called a "new formula" to resolve the dispute, but they repeatedly vowed to push ahead with their nuclear program.

I have closely monitored developments in Iran as a member of the International Relations Committee and the ranking member of the Terrorism and Nonproliferation Subcommittee. It is clear that the Iranian government has no intention of suspending enrichment by August 31, as required by United Nations Security Council Resolution 1696.

The Iranian tactic is always to offer a glimmer of hope that some settlement can be achieved, and threaten all kinds of counter-measures if sanctions are imposed.  For the past four years, Iran has played that game.  It is high time the Security Council and other concerned countries call their bluff unless Iran verifiably suspends enrichment efforts.

It is time for the Security Council to ready a package of tough economic sanctions should Iran fail to do anything short of a full suspension by August 31.  It also is time for the Bush administration to start using the tools at its disposal.  It is time for the United States to impose an embargo on all Iranian goods, punish any American companies with subsidiaries operating in Iran, and actually enforce the Iran Libya Sanctions Act by imposing sanctions on foreign firms which invest in Iran's energy sector.

The U.S. should remain ready to negotiate with the Iranian government, and we should be willing to offer improved relations with Iran should Tehran agree to abandon its nuclear weapons program and its support for terrorists.
At this point, however, Iran must be forced to take such discussions seriously.  Right now, it is just a game for them.  We should stop playing.

Earlier this year I returned home after serving in the U.S. Navy for 31 years. I decided to run for Congress because the Bush Administration and the Republican Congress are taking our country in the wrong direction. I firmly believe that national security begins at home with the health, education, economic, and defense security of our citizens — securities which have been severely eroded by the policies of this Republican Congress and Administration. I am running to reverse that erosion, and to help establish a new direction for our government and country.

I was extremely honored to be selected to address our nation on national security and world wide security issues. This shows that our message of change in the direction of our national security is one that has resonated in our district and is one that is recognized as resonating throughout America. I believe Iraq was a tragic misadventure and was not a clear and present danger. It distracted us from finishing the work needed to fully secure peace in Afghanistan and undermined our ability to focus on security issues elsewhere in the world. Having served as the first Director of ‘Deep Blue,’ the Navy’s anti-terrorism group after 9/11 and having commanded an aircraft carrier battle group of 15,000 men and women that conducted combat operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, I know from firsthand experience that we must address the global aspects of terrorism rather than remaining entrenched in Iraq. In fact, for just two days on what we spend in Iraq, we could have 100 percent screening of all air cargo. For five days in Iraq, we can have radiation detectors at all US ports. It’s clear now more than ever we need a change in Washington so we can once again be looked up to for our leadership in the world.

There are two things that I want to leave as a lasting legacy. First, to highlight that so little is done for the poorest who have suffered from Katrina. They have suffered from hostile acts, such as prematurely closing public housing. I have a bill that I'll be leaving my colleagues as a legacy called the Community Action Homeland Security Mobilization Act. New Orleans will be the pilot project. Then it will be used in other cities to get the poor protected from disasters and acts of terror.
My final bill will be on school costs, repair and modernization for $10 billion.

We need to pass the Senate immigration bill.  We have the votes to do it.  If Speaker Hastert decides to bring it up we can do it in a bipartisan manner.

While the protection of individual civil liberties from an intrusive government is at the core of the Constitution, it should not be a shield for those who are plotting the murder of innocent civilians.  As Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson once said, "The Constitution is not a suicide pact."

We need more tools, not fewer, to defeat the terrorists.  The secret surveillance program, instituted in the wake of the 9-11 attacks, is an effective tool in tracking suspected terrorists.  It only monitors international phone calls to or from the United States where one of the parties is suspected to have links to al Qaeda or other terrorist networks.  Those not part of these terror networks have nothing to worry about.  The concept behind this program is easy to understand:  Find out where the terrorists live, who pays them, and who they are meeting with.  Next, use this information to get them before they get you.  That's what the American people expect.

I was dismayed to read yesterday in Newsday that House Homeland Security Chairman Peter King "has endorsed requiring people of 'Middle Eastern and South Asian' descent to undergo additional security checks because of their ethnicity and religion" in airports. This sort of ethnic profiling is racist, ineffective, and counterproductive.

Allowing unwarranted scrutiny of any brown-skinned person would be a waste of time and energy. Take me for instance. As a Puerto Rican, I am frequently confused for someone of Middle Eastern descent and asked for identification when traveling. I have never posed a threat to anyone and have begun to resent this intrusion on my privacy.

Profiling like this is also a waste of scarce resources. It's important to remember that not all terrorists look "Middle Eastern." Many of the recent arrests in Europe involved home-grown terrorists and converts, who were not of Middle Eastern origin. These plotters were not caught through further screening but rather solid investigative work. The lesson to be learned here is that our counter-terrorism resources should go to improved intelligence and law enforcement, not racial- or religious-based screening.

On this issue, I stand with NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly (formerly head for the U.S. Customs Service) who called the practice "nuts" and "ineffective." Mr. King should retract his statement and work instead on finding practical and real solutions to protecting our homeland rather than calling for an ineffective, discriminatory practice that would lull us into a false of security.

The August 17 decision in ACLU v. NSA declaring unconstitutional the National Security Agency’s foreign intelligence surveillance program is poorly reasoned, reckless, and easy for an appeals court to reverse.  Space here limits describing even the categories, let alone the instances, of errors in Judge Anna Diggs Taylor’s opinion.

Judge Taylor states conclusions without any analysis at all.  She notes, for example, the plaintiffs’ claim that the NSA program violates the Administrative Procedure Act and, 39 pages later, concludes that it does.  The pages in between lack any mention, even a description, of this claim.  Judge Taylor simply skipped it.

Judge Taylor cites court decisions for the opposite of what they held.  Not only is her claim that the Fourth Amendment requires a warrant for every search patently false, but she cited cases affirming that the president’s constitutional authority allows him to gather foreign intelligence without prior judicial approval. Read more...

In another sharp rebuke to the Bush administration’s ongoing abuse of presidential power, a federal court ruled that the National Security Agency cannot continue to intercept the phone calls and emails of Americans without court warrants. This was the first ruling by a federal court on the constitutionality of the illegal spying program and was in response to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union.

In her ruling, U.S. District Court Judge Anna Diggs Taylor agreed with the ACLU that the NSA warrantless spying program violates our rights to free speech and privacy under the First and Fourth Amendments of the Constitution. She also found that the program violated the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). Additionally, she rejected the government’s argument that the case could not proceed because of concerns that “state secrets Read more...

Once again, FEMA's incompetence has reared its ugly head.  Many of you probably read Rep. Henry Waxman's and my letter to acting Director of FEMA David Paulison regarding high levels of formaldehyde in FEMA travel trailers.  In short, it appears that FEMA carelessly overlooked potential hazards in the trailers before they were issued to thousands of hurricane victims.  Preliminary reports indicate that the high levels of formaldehyde mixed with the hot summer air have lead to respiratory problems for trailer residents.

Unfortunately, formaldehyde is not the only problem that FEMA faces right now.  Last week, a report was issued which said that another $1.5 billion was awarded for temporary housing contracts on top of the already $3.4 billion that has been awarded since the hurricanes.  This week, reports have shown that keys issued to FEMA trailer park residents can open as many as 60 trailers in the same park.

Billions of dollars would seemingly be enough to provide safe and adequate housing for hurricane victims, but there remain thousands of people who are still waiting for temporary housing.  In St. Bernard Parish, one of
the hardest hit areas by Hurricane Katrina, 1,600 households are still waiting for trailers or have trailers that are still waiting to be connected to utility lines.  Meanwhile families are forced to live in trailers packed with 10 people when they were designed for three or four. It is simply inexcusable that people are forced to live like this in America. Read more...