t2 b19 wolfensberger memo fdr- entire contents- memo summarizing testimony re making select...

8/14/2019 T2 B19 Wolfensberger Memo Fdr- Entire Contents- Memo Summarizing Testimony Re Making Select Committee o

1/6

MEMO March 25,"2004TO: LEE H. HAMILTONFROM: DONWOLFENSBERGERSUBJECT: TESTIMONY OF HOUSE COMMITTEE CHAIRMEN AND RANKING

DEMOCRATS ON MAKING SELECT COMMITTEE ON HOMELANDSECURITY PERMANENT

This is in response to your interest in the testimony delivered March 24 before the Homeland/vy /Security Subcommittee on Rules by the chairmen andranking minority members of variousHousey ^ ycommittees of shared jurisdiction on the advisability of making the House Select Committee onHomeland Security Permanent. To follow-up, I have downloaded and summarized the statementsof those who presented written testimony.Rep. Porter Goss, Chairman, House Permanent Select Committee onIntelligence - Goss,whois also a member of the Homeland Security Committee (and its Subcommittee onRules which heldthis hearing), points out that for many years the intelligence committee (HPSCI) has been the onlystanding select committee of the House. It was created to provide Congress the ability to overseedisparate departments and organizations throughout the Federal Government and has solejurisdiction over U.S. intelligence and intelligence related activities-not just national and militaryintelligence agencies, but State, Treasury and FBI as well. He says HPSCI is able to do oversightin a thorough and constructive manner without redundancy or he interference of other Houseoversight committees. Their exclusive jurisdiction "is a critical element of our ability to conductcomplete, across-the-board, non-partisan oversight." Thishas included oversight of the intelligenceelements of counter-terrorism and homeland security, In fact, in January2001the leadership createda working group to examine the terrorist threat and the U.S. homeland (after Sept. 11 it was elevatedto a subcommittee). Goss says that while HPSCI "will continue to advocate for its properjurisdiction tooversee andauthorize intelligence community elements including the Terrorist ThreatIntegration Center (TTIC) and the Department of Homeland Security's Information Analysis (IA)Division.... there is more to homeland security than intelligence." The greatest capability that theSelect Committee on Homeland Security can provide is to focus on the enormous Department ofHomeland Security and the integration of its many, many functions. "It can pass its findings on tothe relevant committee or committees that will be charted with the long-term task of DHS." Gossconcludes that intelligence plays an important role inprotecting the nation, and a strong relationshipmust be developed between the intelligence community and the Department of Homeland Security.Rep. Robert Goodatte, Chairman House Committee on Agriculture - Goodlatte takesexception to those who argue that the new department should not be subject to the overlappingjurisdiction of 88 committees and subcommittees in the House and Senate. It is not a matter ofmarking one's jurisdiction or protecting a power base, but rather of adequately covering thecomplexity of the various issues with which Congress has to deal. "The fundamental responsibilityof thecommittees and subcommittees of the House ofRepresentatives is to ensure that the expertiseexists to properlyoversee the functioning of our government." The process of dividing jurisdictions ,is dynamic, and changes are made to take into account the complexities of programs committeescreate and oversee. Additional committees and subcommittees are sometimes created to provideadditional perspectives on issues. This isseldom done"tominimize the accountability of the FederalBureaucracy as would be the outcome if a new permanent standing Committee on HomelandSecurity were to be created."Goodlattenotes that whenDHS was created,3,200 employees were transferred from the Departmentof Agriculture whose responsibilitywas inspecting people and commercial goods coming into the


2/6

Z l t U O t 'AJi 103

country for intentional or unintentional pests that may harm American agriculture. The AgCommittee should remain concerned about unintentional incidents since they are a constant threat,though they are just as concerned about intentional threats. "My fear," Goodlatte continues, "is thata standing Committee on Homeland Security, whose purpose it is to focus on the mitigation ofterrorist threats, might not pay attention to or recognize the damage that is caused byunintentionalintroductions of plant or animal pests or disease." Goodlatte says he cannot see how a singlestandingcommittee, with a nominal staff, can ever amass the expertise necessary to properly overseethis newDepartment." He is therefore "skeptical ofany effort to establish such apermanent standingcommittee" and urges the subcommittee "to be very cautious in considering change..,to theunderlying jurisdictional structure of the House."Rep. Joe Barton, Chairman, House Committee on Energy and Commerce - Barton, whojusttook over aschairman of Energy and Commercea month ago, says he's newto the game. He saysthe work of the select committee has been good, focusing attention of the Congress on some of themost critical issues facing America. "But, with all due respect, the Select Committee's work hereis done." The House has its house in order. His committee has done "incredible work" both beforeand after 9/11 "to protect the homeland (conducting overtwo-dozen homeland related hearings andputting out a half-dozen homeland related bills. The Commerce Committee will continue to fulfillits responsibilities in this area, and, "frankly, the Select Committee has become an impediment tofurther progress." There is no way to distinguish the urisdiction his committeeandothers have overhomeland security from issues they would otherwiseworkon-whetheryou're talking about securityat energy installations or aboutpublic health. Tothose who say the DHS should not have to answerto dozens of committees, Barton responds that the answer is not the formation of a whole newcommittee. The answer "is to ensure that someone coordinates th needs of Congress with theDepartment," and a new committee of 50members won't do any better job than a liaison staffer inthe Speaker's office, and would cost a whole lot less. Barton concludes that wedon't new a newcommittee, we need fewer committees. "What we need is to consolidate th wisdom, andcompetition, andexperience, and excellenceof the members in the existing standing committee thathave the dedication to get the homeland security job done."Rep. Sherwood Bochlert, Chairman, House Committee on Science-TheScience Committeeplayed a central role in the creation of DHS and has vigorously exercised its oversight of it eversince. They are especially proud of having created the Science and Technology Directorate and theAdvanced Research Projects Agency in the Department. The Science Committeehas also overseencybersecurity, programs for firefighters, andvisas forscientists. It has also discussed holding somejointhearingswiththe select committee. But,Boehlert continues, "I do not believe theHouse needsa committee devoted exclusively to Homeland Security," and in fact believe "that such a committeeis likely to prove counter-productive." The reasons he opposes: (1) creating such a committee wouldbe a reversal of the Republicans commitment since 1995 to reducing the number of committees andstaff; (2) there is no demonstrated need for apermanent (Committee. (3) there is no evidence existingcommittees are not doing their job of overseeing the components of the department; (4) there areways to deal with turf issues without creating a new committee; and, (5) a permanent committee"will impede, not assist, proper congressional oversight because any look at the tasks DHS isperforming "needs to be looked at in the context of how the federal government as a whole iscarrying out that job," e.g., in science and technology. Second, committees "can tend to becomecaptives of the agencies they oversee." This would be especially unfortunate in the case of DHSwhich has been given unusual latitude in its founding legislation. There are numerous ways toprevent hopeless proliferation of committees pestering DHS such a assigning primary legislative


3/6

jurisdiction over each directorate of DHS to the appropriate standing committee. A sensible systemof DHS oversight can continue under the peaceable and collegia! situation that has marked theprocess thus far-k"remarkably, even uncharacteristically free of turf battles." Boehlert concludes,"A new permanent committee is more likely to create turf battles than prevent them."Rep. James F. Sensenbrcnner, Jr., Chairman, House Committee on the Judiciary (note: histestimony runs 36pages single spaced)-Sensenbrenner says "the Committee on the Judiciaryshould retain jurisdiction over all matters that it currently has," and, while he is not opposed to aCommittee onHomeland Securityassuch, hebelieves that the proponents of such acommittee havethe burden of proof to show it is needed. Thus far, says Sensenbrenner, "that burdenhasnotyet beensatisfied," Judiciary has been to the 9/11 attacks and the new world we face since its jurisdictioncover not only the judiciary and judicial proceedings, civil and criminal, b ut espionage andcounterfeiting, civil liberties, immigration andnaturalization,and subversive activities affecting theinternal security of th United States.1' The Committee was thus involved in the passage of the USAPatriotact and the Homeland Security Act. That latter acttoucheson thejurisdiction of the JudiciaryCommittee hi three principal areas: immigration, lawenforcement agencies at DHS, and federalandstate law enforcement training both at the Federal La w Enforcement Training Center an d throughgrants to state and local law enforcement administered by the Office of Domestic Preparedness.There follows a lengthy discussion of these three principal areas of jurisdiction that are tied in withDHS and what the committee has been doing since the department's creation. Sensenbrcnnerconcludes by responding to arguments that DHS cannot function effectively if it must report tomultiple committees: first, it now reports to several committees and is functioning effectively;second, every agency reports to at least four committees (House and Senate authorizing andappropriations committees), and despite this, most function effectively; and third, the Judiciaryandthe Select Committee have already shown an ability to work together effectively on projects ofmutual interest. He says the Judiciary Committee should retain its jurisdiction because it has theexperience and expertise, and over the years has shown the ability to apply the unified, balancedapproach that these issues require.Rep. Bill Thomas, Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means -Ways and Means hasjurisdiction over all functions relating to customs and customs administration which cover most ofthe Bureau of Customs and Border Protection and a substantial part of the Bureau of Immigrationand Customs Enforcement ofDHS. The jurisdiction dates back over 220 years to the creation of theCustoms Service which was the first agency of the federal government Thomas says that while hesupported the newdepartment of Homeland Security,he wasconcerned that themove could damagethe critical trade function of Customs. Consequently, he worked with Rep. Rangel and others in theAdministration and the Senate to transfer customs function to the new department but at the sametime maintain the statutory revenue authority with Treasury and prohibit consolidation,discontinuation or diminishing of customs functions .resources, or staffing. It is his understandingthis arrangement has functioned smoothly. Unfortunately, the Bureau of Customs and BorderProtection now in DHS is more intent on enforcing laws than on facilitating trade. While that befitsits mission in DHS, in slights the importance of moving goods across the border in a smooth,efficient and predictable manner (even though such trade comprises 24% of our GDP). For thatreason, continued oversight by Ways and Means is essential. It is also important for reasons ofcompetency: Ways and Means has the technical expertise to ensure this is done right. While theSelect Committee has been, and can continue to be, a useful coordinator of efforts and oversight ofmany committees, oversight of the customs function of the Bureau of Customs and Border Protectionas well as the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement should remain with Ways and


4/6

Means. In conclusion, Thomas supports making the Select Committee permanent "only if we areassured that the ability of Ways and Means to carry out its customs oversight functions would notbe jeopardized. The focus onthe Select Committee.. has, quiteappropriately, beenonsecurity issuesand not the perhaps more mundane, but still critical trade and revenue functions. Weprovide thatexpertise and oversight."Rep. Don Young, Chairman, Committee onTransportation and Infrastructure - Young saysimplicit in the suggestion that the Select Committee be given exclusive oversight authority of DHSis the assumption that the standing committees aren't up to this important tasks and are eitherincapable or uninterested in oversight an d producingeffective homeland security legislation. It alsopresume anewcommittee with little subject matter expertise or institutional knowledge anproducebetter legislation than the sanding committees. This argument is flawed and the evidence points tothe exact opposite conclusion. Only the standing committees have the expertise and institutionalknowledge necessary to address terrorism and have been doing so long before 9/11. Young says hedid not think the select committee was necessary to begin with, "and not much has happened sincethen to change my mind." The homeland security role of agencies is not a separate and distinctfunction from their traditional missions and can only be effectively accomplished in the context ofthose missions. Only members with a thorough understanding of those missions will be able to craftlegislation that addresses the homeland security aspect of these agencies. Young says is the RulesCommittee andLeadership decide tohave a permanent Homeland Security Committee, "then so beit. It won't be the first time they've ignored myadvice, but please don't ignore the expertise of thestanding committees. The House and the nation need them to meet the challenge of terrorism."Young says if the House must have apermanent committee, then a select committee with oversightjurisdiction could focus the House's oversight over the Department without diminishing its[Congress'?] ability to produce effective legislation. If, on the other hand, the House creates apermanent committee with legislative jurisdiction, then it must preserve the standingcommittees'jurisdiction to ensure that their expertise isutilized indrafting homeland security legislation. Sharedjurisdiction is not unusual and is quite manageable in the House. However, "exclusive legislativejurisdiction should not be transferred from the standing committees to a permanent homelandsecurity committee" since this could "severely limit the House's ability to effectively addressterrorism through legislation."Rep. Tom Davis, Chairman, Committee on Government Reform (appearing with Waxman,who has not prepared statement on thewebsite)-Thetwo members believe that, "with positivechanges, the House will be organized to ensure that homeland security receives the resources andscrutiny it deserves." In raise the question of whether the House as currently organized hasan d willcontinue to aggressively and effectively oversee thenew department, and express the belief that "amajor congressional reorganization will only hinder oversight and legislative priorities." Whileothers have testified that without a central committee on homeland security, Congress would dropthe ball, the past year and a half have shown that "is quite simply wrong." There has been no lackof oversight and legislative activity to ensure we get homeland security right The GovernmentReform Committee is fulfilling its role as the primary oversight and investigation committee of theHouse, hoiding numerous oversight hearings, field visits, andmarkup actions relating toDHS. Theynote that while the current system is criticized for the number of committees and subcommittees withlegislativeandoversightjurisdiction, "the creationof apermanent Homeland Securitypanel...wouldonly exacerbate the problem of jurisdictional overlap." Overlap is inherent in th committee system,but a new committee "would only create many new and untested overlaps." Jurisdictional conflictshappen, andcommittee chairmen must manage these conflicts. A new committee would mean new


5/6

turf battles that would delay and even prevent positive outcomes. Instead, only minor adjustmentsare needed to ensure that DHSjemaiias strong and that^Con^reMjs. appropriateloversee ihedepartment. l & o c p icommittees should continue to oversee iheir legacy ^en.cics iwhile Goyeniment Refonji,Government Affairs, would oversee the administration"ttf fee 'departoent's headquarters anadepartment wjde_policies.a well as White:House efforts ib.lcpMdmate homeland. security pqlicy:[Note: Davis does not mention that the Senate does not use multiple referrals like the House.]Government Reform already has jurisdiction over these matters through agency organizationauthority, human capital, IT security, federal-state relations, procurement and management andefficiency of government operations. This proposal would maintain existing areas of expertise andrelationships with executive branch agencies andwould strengthen the parallel structure of House-Senate relations. Designating the GovernmentReform Committeeas the lead committeeoncross-agency proposals when no other committee would naturally receive the primary referral, wouldensure that homeland security efforts will be coordinated.Rep. Bart Gordon,Ranking Minority Member, Committee onScience - Growing acommitteefrom scratch is an appreciablydifficult task."and the select committee has done a commendable jobat their core task of keeping track of the progress of the new department. However, "the corerationale ofthe Select Committee-oversight of themessy andtumultuous processofbringing a newdepartment is eroding by the day" (presumably as the department becomes more established andsettled]. Beyond that rationale the central argument for keeping the select committee is that it willenhance the efficiency of the workings of the House. Gordon says that claim is based on a faultyunderstanding of the House, its committee structure and operations. In fact, retaining the selectcommittee would have a deleterious effects on the House. Existing committees with jurisdictionoverhomeland security are doing agoodjob of fulfilling their responsibilities. There is only one waythat the select committee will enhance the efficiency of theHouse, and that is "if all other standingcommittees are stripped of their legislative and oversight jurisdiction over Homeland Security."Absent that, only new inefficiencies will be introduced if the select committee is retained as onemore sharer ofjurisdiction. Aperfectly reasonable solution to handling authorizing legislation is todowhat the senatedid and that is to designate alead committeeasGovernmentAffairs now is in theSenate. Moreover, "any legislation comingoutoftheHouse that hopes tosurvive the Senateprocesswill have totake that into account." Gordon isskeptical about theneed for or likelihood of a singleauthorization for the department. If the is such a need, the Speaker has plenty of tool to deal withthe current overlappingjurisdictions-again following the Senate model of a lead committee beingthe most obvious. This is how we handle other major pieces of authorization. Gordon says theargument thata newselect committee would streamlinetheoversightprocesson thehill is fallaciousunless all other committees arecompletely stripped of their oversight jurisdiction. Otherwise, youwill simply be inflating rather than deflating the number of committee withjurisdiction.This is notefficiency enhancement. It is not enough to argue that the agency will have to answer to multiplecommittees. That'snow thecase, for instance, onenergy legislation (Scienceshare urisdiction with8 other committees). Yet Sec. Abraham has only been to the 111 27 times since this confirmationhearing. If alljurisdictionwere centered in onecommittee, the existing expertise andexperience ofother committees would be lost. Finally, the Congress is supposed to be a deliberative body,designed to examine, challenge, consider. Hamilton noted in Federalist #70 that "promptitude ofdecision osoftener an evil than abenefit. Thedifferencesof opinion, and the jarring ofparties inthat department of the government, though they may sometimes obstruct salutary plans, yet oftenpromote deliberation and circumspection, and serve to check excesses in the majority," Gordonconcludes from this that it is against the natureof the House and the intent of how it should conduct


6/6

business that it pursue "efficiency" as an overriding goal in how it organizes its business. Clearlinesof legislative jurisdiction among th standing committees and clear guidance from the Speaker willbe more than adequate efficiency when it comes to moving legislation. And, when it comes tooversight, "a little obscurity is a good thing to create a sense of competition among the committeesin examining the workingof the Department-challenging the claims that come up to us and in askingquestions. More oversight is better than less oversight, and you purchase that through the'inefficiency' of multiple committees having a stake in the department's operation."Rep. Charles R. Rangel, Ranking Minority Member, Committee on Ways and Means TheSelect Committee played a valuable role in the implementation of the Homeland Security Act of2002, monitoring the activities of the DHS and providing a meaningful congressional forum fordiscussion of our homeland security activities, problems and concerns. Rangel believes that theSelect Committee could play a continuing role "in coordinating the oversight and authorizationactivities of the various House committees that retain primary jurisdiction over elements of DHS,"However, hethinks that Ways andMeans continues tohave animportant role in directly overseeingthe customs activities of DHS, and in particular the Customs and Border Protection Division. Therest of his testimony reflects that of Chairman Thomas (above) in this regard. He concludes byrepeating that the select committee "could have a role to play" in coordinating the activities of thestanding committees and in providing technical support on a bipartisan basis. Continued oversightof DHS priorities and decisions "will undoubtedly create balanced good government analyses thatwill benefit all members of Congress."Reps. Michael G. Oxley and Barney Frank, Chairman and Ranking Minority member,Committee onFinancial Services (could notattend but submitted a joint statement) - Theirstatement will not address whether the select committee should be made a permanent committee, butrather will lay out the important work done by the Committee on Financial Services in the area ofhomeland security. Their summary of activities runs seven pages single-spaced, plus a 5-page letterfrom the last Congress to Richard Armey, chairman of the predecessor select committee.

t2 b19 wolfensberger memo fdr- entire contents- memo summarizing testimony re making select...

Documents