H214 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE
Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, after more than 2 years of needless delay, the House is finally taking action on the balance of the recommendations made by the 9/11 Commission. This is a large bill that tackles a range of critical issues, but I want to comment on three areas in particular: risk-based funding for homeland security needs, making our first responder's communications truly interoperable, and measures we need to take overseas to stop the terrorist from getting here in the first place.
For the past several years, I've sponsored a series of homeland security grant writing workshops for first responder organizations in my district. These workshops are always well attended and I'm pleased that they've been of value in helping various fire, EMS, and police departments cross central New Jersey become competitive in applying for these grants.
However, the one question I get most often from these professionals is ''Why aren't these grants allocated on the basis of risk?'' I know many of my colleagues were hearing the same thing from their first responders, which is why last year I joined a number of my colleagues in sending a letter to Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff asking him to make grant award decisions on the basis of risk. While DHS has made some progress in this area, it hasn't come far enough quickly enough. That's why I'm pleased that this bill requires DHS to use a risk-based funding formula when allocating these grants. New Jersey is at far greater risk of attack-and it has more infrastructure targets, like chemical plants-than more rural, less densely populated states. Our vulnerabilities require commensurately greater resources.
Another critical fix contained in this bill is a grant program dedicated to communications interoperability. As incredible as it may seem, 5 years after the 9/11 attacks, and one year after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, the Department of Homeland Security still does not allocate funds specifically for the purpose of helping local first responders coordinate in an emergency. As a result, states and localities are forced to rob Peter to pay Paul by using large chunks of homeland security grant funding-in some instances 80 percent-to purchase communications equipment. As a result, fewer resources are spent securing bridges, ports, and buildings. This is a false choice being forced upon local officials. Today's legislation is a down payment on those needs.
Importantly, the federal grants can be used only for equipment, technology, and systems that have been determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security to meet emergency communications equipment and technology standards. Therefore, State and local governments will be protected from relying solely on the claims of vendors, and can use the grants to invest in emerging technologies, not the same dinosaur systems that first responders historically have been forced to rely on. Also, this bill also takes steps to ensure the completion of a National Emergency Communication Plan. Such a plan will help to ensure that Federal, State, and local governments are developing plans and systems to improve multi-jurisdictions communications in an emergency that is truly ''National'' in scope.
Finally, while this bill includes useful provisions for strengthening our outreach to the Islamic world, we have to recognize that defensive measures at home are necessary in part because of a failure of our policies abroad. For decades, our government has had a devil's bargain with a number of corrupt, despotic regimes in the Middle East and South Asia: they help us maintain order in the region, and we help them maintain order at home. We don't like to talk about this hypocritical double standard, but it exists, and it is impossible to truly quantify how much damage that hypocrisy and our support for such dictatorial regimes has cost us.
This is another legacy of the Cold War, where any country-no matter how brutal its government-was a potential ally for us against the Soviets. The same misguided approach is now being applied in our relationships with various countries with corrupt, brutal governments that ruthlessly suppress dissent at home even as they proclaim their solidarity with us in the war against Al Qaeda and like-minded groups. The reality is that by viciously obliterating the voices of moderation in their societies, these despotic regimes are paving the way for Al Qaeda. By eliminating those calling for a free press and free elections, these governments are driving ever-greater numbers of Muslims into bin Laden's ranks. So long as we stand by and let them repress or destroy the voices of moderation in these countries, will we be complicit in the creation of the next generation of people who reject democracy in favor of the Kalishnikov rifle or the car bomb. Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased that the House will pass this bill today and I will gladly support it. But we must know that even if this bill becomes law, the work of protecting our citizens and restoring our country's standing in the world has only begun.