Below is the House floor statement of U.S. Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard upon passage by the House of the Homeland Security Appropriations conference report today by a vote of 368 to 0.  In the statement, the congresswoman refers to the successful inclusion of a provision preventing the Department of Homeland Security from privatizing immigration officers.  The congresswoman offered a successful House floor amendment on June 18, which passed 242 to 163, and the House-Senate conferees voted to include the language.  The president had threatened to veto the bill if the provision was included. 

U.S. Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard
Conference Report Floor Statement
HR 4567, FY2005 Homeland Security Appropriations Bill
October 9, 2004

Mr. Speaker,

I rise in support of the Homeland Security Appropriations conference report.

I would like to begin by commending Homeland Security Subcommittee Chairman Hal Rogers and Appropriations Committee Chairman Bill Young for their efforts to address our nation's security needs with the unrealistic budget limits that were forced upon them. 

I also thank Chairmen Rogers and Young for including in the Homeland Security conference report several items I requested to address issues of concern I raised during subcommittee hearings with representatives of the Department of Homeland Security.  Included in this final conference report, for example, are the following items:

Security Training -- Congress has done much to address the security of our aviation system since the events of September 2001.  However, I was concerned that Congress had not adequately addressed the issue of security training for flight attendants, potentially the last line of defense in the aircraft cabin.  This bill directs the FAA to issue regulations for basic security training for flight attendants.

Port Security Grants - Another of my concerns was that resources currently dedicated to port security are too often diverted to private shippers at the ports while the port authority received minimal if any funds.  This bill states the committee's belief that port security grants, for the 55 ports of national significance, should be based on findings contained within port vulnerability assessments.  This means that limited resources for port grants will be used where they are needed most. 

Security Assessments - In addition, I was concerned that critical security assessments had not been completed.  This bill establishes a deadline for the completion of security assessments for the top 1700 critical infrastructure elements and key assets identified by the Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection Directorate.  This deadline will help ensure security assessments on such items as monuments, landmarks, power plants, highways, and food and water sources will be completed by the Department.

Independent Districts -- Many of the districts that operate bridges and highways are independent authorities, and as such, their eligibility to apply for certain homeland security grants had been in question.  The bill clarifies the eligibility of independent districts, such as bridge authorities, to compete for homeland security grants. 

Immigration Officers -- The bill also includes language I drafted to prevent the Department of Homeland Security from moving forward with the unnecessary and potentially dangerous privatization of key immigration officers at the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services.  These officers are responsible for handling classified information used to prevent fraud and the exploitation of our immigration laws.  I am pleased that this inherently governmental work will continue to remain the responsibility of trained and experienced federal employees directly accountable to the Department and not to the bottom line of a private company.  And I take the opportunity to thank the ranking member, David Obey, and ranking member Martin Sabo of the Homeland Security Subcommittee for their efforts to keep this language in the bill.

In addition, the bill addresses two issues of importance to urban communities such as my own.

First, funding for the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) grant program to protect high threat urban areas was more than doubled for a total of $1.3 billion.  These additional resources are critical to our nation's large urban areas which face a higher terrorist threat than other parts of the country.

Second, state and local emergency managers will benefit significantly from an increase of $56 million for Emergency Management Performance Grants.  In California , emergency managers use these grants to develop plans to help prepare our residents for disasters such as earthquakes, fires, floods, or terrorist attacks.  Although Congress has called this grant program "the backbone of the nation's emergency management system" it has been drastically underfunded for years, and this funding increase is certainly a step in the right direction. 

However, Mr. Speaker, despite the fact that this Homeland Security Appropriations conference report resolves several of the issues I raised in hearings and increases funding levels in certain accounts, I remain seriously concerned that this bill as a whole underfunds important homeland security initiatives and programs.

I am disturbed that the measure retains the current formula for state-wide grants that continues to underfund the homeland security needs of my home state, California .  Over the past several years, the Department of Homeland Security has distributed 60% of these formula grants on a per capita basis that does not consider critical infrastructure, vulnerabilities, or the actual risk of terrorist attacks. For example, although California is the most populous state with the most areas deemed at high-risk of terrorist attack, it actually receives far less funding on a per capita basis than any other state.  In a time of heightened national security and limited local resources, we need to ensure that federal resources are targeted where they will be most productive in fighting the war on terror. 

I am also concerned by the deep budget cuts this bill makes to the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services.  This bureau is charged with processing work authorization and citizenship applications for immigrants in our country.  This bill includes only $160 million to reduce the backlog of these unprocessed documents, a decrease of nearly $75 million from fiscal year 2004.  These funding cuts simply do not make sense given that during the last three years, the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services has fallen far short of meeting its six month goal for processing citizenship applications.  In fact, the backlog of these applications has grown from three million to more than six million nationally.  These backlogs send the wrong message to our nation's immigrants who are eager to become full participants in our society, but must wait years before their citizenship applications can be reviewed and processed.  I am hopeful that next year the President's budget will request enough funds to realistically address the Bureau's huge case backlog.

And lastly, it is disappointing that the bill reduces to 75% the federal contribution given to airports to install state-of-the-art in-line baggage screening equipment.  Previously, certain airports had signed letter of intent (LOI) agreements committing the federal government to pay 90% of these costs.  Reducing the federal contribution creates an additional burden for our communities and their airports.  I regret that Congress will not honor our original commitment to pay 90% of the costs.

Unfortunately, fully addressing these and other critical national security concerns requires resources that Republican congressional leaders simply do not provide in this bill. 

Nevertheless, Mr. Speaker, I will support this conference report to provide the resources, although limited, to help make our country safer.