Date: 2008-02-12
Speaker: DANIEL E. LUNGREN (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. Well. -here we go again. Mr. Speaker. As Yogi Berra once put it. "This is like deja vu all over again." When the Director of National Intelligence. Admiral McConnell. came to the Congress for help. he iias only given a 180day authority to conduct surveillance which he described at the time as necessary to close our "critical intelligence gaps.". Of course. that authority expired on February 1. and the 2week extension of the Protect America Act expires this Friday. Now. while the Democratic majoritys socalled RESTORE Act passed by this body recognized the need to defend our Nation beyond 180 days. it would also have repealed core provisions requested by Admiral McConnell. and it also contained a sunset date approximately 2 years from now. While the other body has just passed this evening a 6year extension of the new FISA bill. it remains to be seen how this will be reconciled with the RESTORE Act passed by this body. It is certainly my hope that this body will affirm the bipartisan agreement reached by the Senate this evening. It is in concert with the outline of a bill supported by 21 Members of the majority side in a letter they sent to the Speaker just several weeks ago. In my estimation. there is no issue of greater Importance to our Nation at the present time. The surveillance of foreign terrorists is critical to our ability to protect our homeland and to assure the safety of the American people. The other body has risen to this challenge by passing legislation that may not be perfect but which does respond to the basic concerns laid out by Admiral McConnell. Yet. according to press accounts Ive seen. some have suggested that the expiration of the Protect America Act wouldnt be that consequential because they say it would not interfere with surveillance which has already begun. Well. let me suggest that even if that were the case. it completely ignores the impact on new terrorist communications which may arise. For instance. if we get word on Saturday. February 16. that an al Qaeda member in Kandahar is on the line with someone in Munich on a call that travels through a New York switch. this is a conversation which should be of interest to us. The point is. if the Protect America Act is allowed to expire. the bill in the Senate is not passed. this terrorist communication may not be intercepted. I would add that we have had plenty of time to view this issue. We have had plenty of discussion on the relevant committees. and now the bipartisan bill that passed the other body is available for us to act upon. What must the rest of the world. much less the terrorists who seek to kill us. think of the national security policy that we have displayed of fits and starts? This hardly resembles the actions of a -super power determined to protect its citizens from such an ominous outcome. The only hope that we can have is that such indecision perhaps will be construed as a plan to confuse the terrorists. double jujitsu. if you will. On the other hand. those of us who view the rest of the world through the jihadist prism may be picking up a very different message concerning the level of our determination. This on again. off again policy of terrorist surveillance has to end. We must give Admiral McConnell and those in the intelligence community under his charge the tools necessary to protect the American people. and we must do so on a permanent basis. Does anyone realistically believe the imposition of arbitrary sunsets every few weeks or every few months somehow places us in the position to return to a pre9/11 world? Such wish fulfillment is no basis for the formulation of national security policy. for we no longer live in a world where wishful thinking is permissible if we are to fulfill our obligation to those who have sent us here to represent them and protect them. This is the first obligation of government. And after 9/11 or 77 in London. Bali. Madrid. Amman Jordan. and Glasgow. we no longer have the option to pretend otherwise. 0] 2100 Our policy as a nation must begin with the- recognition of this reality. However inconvenient or discomforting it might be for some of -us. we must recognize that meeting the challenge posed by those who seek to kill us is going to be a longterm. not shortterm. challenge. It therefore requires a longterm investment in our security. We cannot just be thinking about 2 weeks. or 21 days. or 6 months. or 2 years out. The gravity of the challenge we face requires a commitment which is commensurate with the serious nature of the threat. The American people demand that this be our serious approach. Although it is my belief that a permanent reauthorization is therefore consistent with the history of the FISA Act. consistent with the threat that we face. and consistent with what the American people wish. the 6year extension contained in the bipartisan language whichpassed the other body this evening is a meaningful compromise. We must send a clear message to terrorists that we understand the nature of our struggle. There must be no doubt in their minds that we will never forget what they have done and that we are committed to the long haul. I take a back seat to no one on the question of the need for vigorous congressional oversight of the executive branch. I spoke about this before I returned to this Congress after a 16year absence. However. when we are told by Admiral M6Connell what he needs and then this body does not listen and attempts to reinvent the wheel with the socalled RESTORE Act. there surely should be some compelling justification for such a rejection of the Director of National Intelligence request. Let me suggest that it has been more than 6 months since the enactment of the Protect America Act. So what is the factual basis to justify the dramatic changes that were embodied in the majority partys socalled RESTORE Act? After all this time. what is the evidence that Admiral McConnell was wrong? We now have the benefit of 20/20 hindsight. It is no longer necessary for us to speculate. So how are the changes to -the Protect America Act embodied in the RESTORE Act borne out by experience? We now have the basis for making empirical judgments. and unless there are answers to these basic questions. attempts to rewrite Admiral McConnells bottom line are nothing more than a leap into the dark. a serious existential leap concerning the safety and security of all Americans. Or is there something else other than evidence at work here? During our legislative hearings in the Judiciary Committee. there were concerns expressed that in reaching the compromise agreement which became the Protect America Act that somehow the White House may have unduly influenced the process. There were questions raised about whether Admiral McConnell could speak truth to power. Let me first of all say that the interest of the White House in protecting the national security of our Nation is about as much of a surprise as the discovery that gambling was going on in Joes Bar in the movie "Casablanca." It would be more of a shock to learn the administration. or any administration for that matter. lacked an interest in a matter of such magnitude relating to its essential obligation to protect the American people. After 9/11. it should never again happen that everything that could be done wasnt done to ensure that we connect the dots. No. the real issue here was one of credibility. or so some attempted to make it. the credibility of Admiral McConnell concerning. as was stated by one of my colleagues on our committee. to speak truth to power: One interesting incident subsequent to the adoption of the socalled RESTORE Act provides us with persuasive evidence of Admiral McConnells independent judgment. Regardless of how one interprets the National Intelligence Estimate concerning Iran. any attempt to attack Admiral McConnell as a tool of the Bush administration would appear to be lacking in any credibility whatsoever. There should be no doubt in anyones mind that Admiral McConnell is a man of honor who calls it as he sees it. This is important because he told us how he sees it. and unlike the bipartisan coalition in the other body. our adoption of the majority partys RESTORE Act proved. I fear. that we did not listen to him with seriousness of purpose. It was not enough that this man had served in Democrat and Republican administrations and had a distinguished naval career. After all. some would say we are talking about the Bush administration. So let me suggest. this is not about President Bush. As bumper stickers I have seen on the road reflect. by 1/20/09 President Bush will no longer be in office. We will have a neim administration and a new President. whomever he or she will be. But whomever they will be. they will continue to face the same threat by radical jihadists whose primary aim in life is to kill us. That will not change. Regardless of which political party occupies the White House. the one advantage we will need to defend against another horrific attack will be the need to learn of their plans before they are carried out. to gather intelligence. and if we are to. be successful in doing so. the surveillance of foreign terrorists will be critical to this endeavor. Independent sources such as Brian Jenkins of the RAND Corporation have stressed that- our intelligence capability is a key element in our effort to protect our homeland. He states that in the terror attacks since 9/11. we have seen combinations of local conspiracies inspired by. assisted by. and guided by al Qaedas central leadership. It is essential that while protecting the basic rights of American citizens. we find ways to facilitate the collection and exchange of intelligence across -national and bureaucratic borders. . H864 CC The development of comprehensive homeland security strategy cannot be conceived in isolation from the need for surveillance of terrorists overseas. The Director of National Intelligence has told us what he needs. and unfortunately. that is not encompassed in the socalled RESTORE Act. which passed this body. this body. in November. Unless the bipartisan agreement which passed the other body this evening is adopted. we will be without the minimum acceptable threshold of protection negotiated with Admiral McConnell last August. Although this body did adopt the socalled RESTORE Act in November of last year. that legislation would impose additional -burdens on the intelligence community which undermined the essential nature of the compromise reached with Admiral McConnell. Furthermore. the RESTORE Act punted on the critical question of whether retroactive protection could be extended to those communication providers who responded to the call for help from their government in the wake of 9/11. What does that mean? It means simply this: while we recognize in other situations that a Good Samaritan law makes sense. that is. we want to encourage doctors or health care providers who come upon an accident on the highway to utilize their expertise to help those who might be injured at that location without regard to the possibility of lawsuits thereafter. even though we know that that might. in some cases. make it impossible to sue a doctor for what otherwise would be considered malpractice. We make that judgment because we believe on balance it is for the good of society and in most cases will allow extra protections or extra treatment that otherwise might not be there for someone who has been the victim of such an accident. Similarly. the Senate bill recognizes how important it is that we have the intelligence necessary to identify the threat that is posed by those who would wish to kill us and destroy us in the name of some distorted version of religious purpose. And so what we have said. at least what the other body has said. what the President has asked for. what Admiral McConnell has asked for is a type of national Good Samaritan law with respect to the collection of foreign intelligence. In other words. when in an emergency situation. in a terrorist scenario. in the aftermath of 9/11. when the government desperately needs to be able to gather as much information as possible with respect to foreign intelligence. foreign actors who wish to do harm to us. the government reached out to various companies who are able to aid them in that way. and all the bill that has passed the Senate does. and the bill which hopefully will be before us sometime this week. all it does is say that if you responded in good faith to the request of the Federal Government to assist in the collection of