|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
 |
 |
    |
|
|
|||
 |
|
||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Debate Heats Up on Homeland Security Legislation
A member of the Sept. 11 commission yesterday called for approval of legislation that would implement more of the panel’s recommendations for Half of the commission’s recommendations were enacted under the previous, Republican-led Congress, according to former commission vice chairman Lee Hamilton. Democrats who now control the House of Representatives have made implementing additional recommendations a component of their agenda for their first 100 hours as the majority party. Legislation could come for a vote this week. “It carries out the recommendations that we have made,” Proposals include creating a presidential office to coordinate efforts against terrorism and WMD proliferation, establishing an independent panel to track government nonproliferation efforts, and conducting screening within four years of all air cargo and luggage and of cargo at major seaports. Republicans criticized Democrats for failing to meet their pledge to implement all commission recommendations, the Post reported. The new majority party is restricting debate, and Democrats are backing proposals they once opposed, according to the GOP. The legislation is a “missed opportunity,” said Representative Peter King (N.Y.), the senior Republican on the House Homeland Security Committee. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle in the Senate have been less enthusiastic about some of the proposals — particularly cutting antiterrorism funding for some states in favor of those considered to be most at risk — and have not proposed legislation that would mirror the House plan. “It’s a very aggressive proposal, more aggressive than I would have thought,” said Michael Greenberger, head of the Center for Health and Homeland Security at the “I don’t understand why we have to assume that everything that came out of the 9/11 commission is accurate and it should be axiomatic that the House should approve everything they proposed,” said Michael O’Hanlon, a security analyst at the Brookings Institution. The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee was hearing testimony today on the Sept. 11 commission recommendations. The Senate is expected to vote on legislation by the end of January, according to a spokeswoman for committee Chairman Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) (Eggen/Hsu, Washington Post, Jan. 9). Senators from both parties have questioned the value of including the requirement for full screening of cargo in the legislation, the New York Times reported. Roughly 30 percent of air cargo now undergoes inspection by dogs or devices. Five percent of ship containers entering the “Inspecting every container could cause ports to literally shut down,” said Homeland Security Department spokesman Russ Knocke. “Airplane passengers must be assured that any cargo on a passenger jet will not pose a terrorist threat,” Lieberman said. “But we must achieve these goals in an efficient manner to allow for the free flow of commerce without placing undue economic burdens on importers or bringing air traffic to a standstill.” Tests on new technology should be finished before a requirement is set requiring inspections of all cargo, according to Lieberman and Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii). Setting deadlines for complete inspections — three years for passenger jet cargo, five for scanning U.S.-bound sea cargo at foreign ports for nuclear material — is necessary, supporters say. “We need firm deadlines to end the administration’s foot-dragging,” said Senator Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.). Questions also remain on whether deployed screening technology would be capable of serving its intended purpose, the Times reported. Nuclear material could be shielded to prevent detection, while terrorists could use private boats or other means to transport weapons to the
| ||||||||||
Back to top
