The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“AVIATION SECURITY ACT” mentioning the U.S. Dept of Labor was published in the Senate section on pages S10432-S10446 on Oct. 10, 2001.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
AVIATION SECURITY ACT
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (S. 1447) to improve aviation security and for other purposes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina.
Amendment No. 1854
Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, on behalf of the distinguished Senator from Arizona and myself, Senator Hutchison of Texas, Senator Rockefeller of West Virginia, and Senator Kerry of Massachusetts, I send the managers' amendment to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. Hollings], for himself and Mr. McCain, Mrs. Hutchinson, Mr. Rockefeller, and Mr. Kerry, proposes an amendment numbered 1854.
Mr. HOLLINGS. I ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The text of the amendment is printed in today's Record under
``Amendments Submitted.''
Amendment No. 1855
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from South Dakota [Mr. Daschle], for Mrs. Carnahan, for herself, Mr. Daschle, Mr. Kennedy, Mrs. Murray, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Fitzgerald, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Smith of Oregon, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Dayton, and Mr. Wyden, proposes an amendment numbered 1855.
Mr. DASCHLE. I ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The text of the amendment is printed in today's Record under
``Amendments Submitted.''
CLOTURE MOTION
Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I send a cloture motion on the amendment to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The cloture motion having been presented under rule XXII, the Chair directs the clerk to read the motion.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
Cloture Motion
We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, hereby move to bring to a close the debate on the Daschle amendment No. 1855 to S. 1447, the Aviation Security bill.
Harry Reid, Bob Graham, Bob Torricelli, Jean Carnahan,
Jeff Bingaman, Maria Cantwell, Richard J. Durbin, John
Kerry, Jay Rockefeller, Mark Dayton, Ben Nelson of
Nebraska, Evan Bayh, Tim Johnson, Russell Feingold,
Kent Conrad, Tom Daschle, Bill Nelson of Florida,
Edward M. Kennedy, Barbara A. Mikulski, and Paul
Wellstone.
Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I announce to all our colleagues there will be no more rollcall votes today. Details about tomorrow's schedule will be made available a little later in the day.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri is recognized.
Mrs. CARNAHAN. Mr. President, I spoke yesterday about the need for the Senate to act on behalf of the workers in the airline industry--
those men and women who lost their jobs as a result of the September 11 attacks. The time to act is here and now.
My amendment is designed to provide assistance to those who were laid off as a result of the September 11 attacks and the corresponding reductions in air service. They include employees of the airlines, airports, aircraft manufacturers, and suppliers to the airlines.
Using the framework of the Trade Adjustment Assistance Act, this legislation provides income support, job training, and health care benefits for these laid off workers.
This amendment extends unemployment compensation for 20 weeks, after eligible employees have exhausted their State's unemployment benefits.
It also provides for job training, so that those unable to return to the airline industry can acquire new skills.
Many laid-off workers and their families will face the frightening prospect of losing their health insurance. The legislation that I am proposing would enable families to continue their health insurance by reimbursing COBRA premiums for 12 months.
We know that some workers may not be eligible for extended health coverage through COBRA. Therefore, my proposal also enables States to provide Medicaid coverage for those workers and their families.
Lastly, my amendment acknowledges that the unemployment compensation program is imperfect. Many workers who lose their jobs are not eligible for any assistance under current law.
Under my proposal, those who are ineligible for their State's unemployment insurance programs would receive 26 weeks of income support. These payments are designed to mirror unemployment compensation.
This legislation is not a panacea. It is a first step. We acted quickly to shore up the airline industry. That was appropriate. But that legislation did nothing for the 140,000 who are being laid-off despite the assistance provided in the stabilization package.
There are other Americans who have also lost their jobs due to the slowing economy. Their needs should be addressed as part of the economic stimulus package. But, we must act now to assist employees of the airline industry who have suffered immediate, abrupt layoffs of enormous proportions.
The amendment I have proposed has broad support. The nation's Governors have asked Congress to pass it.
The major airlines support this assistance for their former employees. Republican and Democratic Senators support it.
Now is the time to act. The Senate ought to pass this measure now and move on to our other pressing business.
I have reached across the aisle in crafting this proposal. The amendment has three Republican co-sponsors: Senators Brownback, Fitzgerald, and Gordon Smith.
I have also scaled back my original legislation to make it more attractive to my colleagues. The total cost is $1.9 billion--half the cost of the original package.
The amendment includes an offset so this package of benefits is entirely paid for.
Let me assure my colleagues that it is not my intention to slow consideration of the important airline security legislation. I am a co-
sponsor of the airline security bill and am eager to see it pass the Senate. We need to institute permanent security measures and restore Americans' confidence in the safety of air travel.
I have been ready, and eagerly awaiting the opportunity, to debate this amendment for the past week. And I am ready to go to a vote right now.
So for those concerned about delay of the airline security bill I hope that you agree we should vote on this proposal tonight. I am not interested in delay. I am interested in helping workers. I would have liked both the airline safety bill and the worker relief packaged completed last week instead of being subjected to a filibuster.
I am aware of comments that some believe that this amendment should not be considered as part of the airline safety bill, but rather should be considered later, as part of other legislation. But that is precisely what I was told over two weeks ago. I originally proposed to provide relief to laid off airline workers at the same time as we provided relief to the airlines.
I did not offer my amendment then because the leadership of both houses of Congress had reached agreement on the airline package and we had to pass the bill immediately.
We all agree that airline security legislation is extremely urgent. So is relief to airline workers. It is time to show some urgency on behalf of the men and women in the airline industry.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished chairman of the committee for the usual cooperation and bipartisanship which he has displayed on many occasions in the past in his duties as chairman of the Commerce Committee. It has also been my pleasure to have had the opportunity to work with him, including on this very important piece of legislation. Perhaps the distinguished chairman and I have not worked on a bill that is more important and significant as this one.
This bill would significantly enhance aviation security by making the Federal Government directly responsible and accountable for the screening of airline passengers and their baggage. Although there are many other parts of this bill that are intended to improve security, the shift in responsibility for passenger screening is the most profound. But nothing less is required given that the events of September 11 have forever changed how we view air travel. Unfortunately, we have learned a hard lesson that we face an enemy that is willing to sacrifice itself and thousands of innocents to obtain its ends. Aviation security has now become a critical element of national security, and this requires a fundamental change in our approach. Congress must act to ensure that safety and security remain our foremost concern.
To handle and coordinate all aviation security matters for the Federal Government, including the new screening functions, the bill creates a new, high-level position within the Department of Transportation (DOT). Nevertheless, there would be close coordination with other Federal agencies, particularly those involved in law enforcement, intelligence and national security. Cooperation among Federal agencies will be just as important to our effort to safeguard aviation as it will be in our larger battle to root out and destroy terrorist networks. Accountability is also important, and when it comes to aviation security, there will not be one Federal official to serve as the focal point for all our efforts.
This bill includes numerous other provisions designed to improve aviation security. For example, the Federal air marshal program is broadly expanded, and airports are required to strengthen control over access points to secure areas. In addition, cockpit doors must be strengthened and flight crews would be given up-to-date training on how to handle hijacking situations. The bill would also take steps to ensure that our Nation's flight schools are not being used by terrorists. For the current fiscal year, airports would be given the flexibility to use Federal airport grants to pay for increased costs associated with new security mandates.
I know that some of my colleagues may have concerns about the Federal Government assuming the burden of screening hundreds of millions of airline passengers each year. As a proud fiscal conservative, I do not advocate this move lightly. But the attack last month was an act of war, and we must respond accordingly. As a matter of national security, passenger screening can no longer be left to the private sector. I am one of the most ardent proponents of free enterprise and the entrepreneurial spirit of America. However, this is not an area where decisions should be driven by the bottom line. The Federal Government does not contract out the work of Customs agents, the Border Patrol, the INS, and many other agencies that perform functions similar to the screening that we are dealing with here. We should not contract out the screening of airline passengers.
By the way, recently there was a CNN poll taken where people could instantly respond as to whether screening employees should be done by Federal employees or contracted out. Eighty-seven percent of the hundreds of thousands of people who responded to that CNN poll said the Federal Government should assume that responsibility.
It is also a question about whether the Department of Justice or Department of Transportation should have the authority in this matter. In all candor, one of the reasons is because of the lack of success in the past of some of the programs and implementation of some of the recommendations that were made by the Department of Transportation Inspector General, the GAO, and others. That will be a subject of debate as we consider this legislation.
The present legislation gives DOT the authority to fire or suspend any screener and prohibit him or her from returning to screening duties regardless of any civil service employment laws to the contrary. Furthermore, screeners would also be prohibited from striking. To offset some of the additional costs to government, airlines would be charged a security fee based upon the number of passengers they carry.
Because there are many small airports across the country that may not need a full complement of screeners throughout the day, the Department of Transportation would have the option of requiring smaller airports to contract out the screening work to State or local law enforcement officials. This could only be done if the screening services and training of local officers are the same and the Federal Government reimburses the airport. There would also be some flexibility for DOT to adopt different security measures at smaller airports depending upon airport conditions and the level of airline activity.
I know that some people may be concerned about the transition period if we do move to full Federal control over the screening process. Some believe that screening services may suffer if current employees and companies know that they will be phased out in the coming months. The bill addresses this concern by giving DOT the flexibility to make whatever arrangements are necessary to ensure security in the interim. For example, DOT could enter into new, short-term contracts with screening companies that provide for upgraded services while at the same time compensating the companies, and perhaps employees, for the temporary nature of the new arrangement.
I would also point out that the average turnover, because of the low pay in salary and benefits, at major airports is 125 percent per year. At one airport it is as high as 400 percent per year, but that is because the people who now are employed as screeners can make more money by going down and working at a concession at the same airport.
So let's have no doubt about the transience, the documented transience of these people who work there, who are good and decent, fine American citizens, but they are low paid, and they are ill-
trained. That is not their fault. I want to make that perfectly clear.
The Commerce Committee has held several aviation security hearings over the last few years, including one 3 weeks ago. We have repeatedly been told by the DOT Inspector General, the General Accounting Office, and many others that there are flaws in our aviation security systems, especially in the area of passenger and baggage screening. Although we addressed some of these concerns in legislation enacted last year, we clearly must go much farther now. Anything approaching the status quo is no longer acceptable. It is vital that aviation security be provided by professional individuals who are well paid, well trained, and well motivated.
The events of the past few days underscore the need for us take action immediately. Our military strike against terrorist bases increases the risk of another terrorist attack on our own soil. While more than aviation is threatened, we know all too well it is an area that terrorists have targeted before and something they have gone to great lengths to learn about.
Aviation is more important than ever to our economic and social well-
being. We cannot avoid the tough choices when it comes to security. The traveling public needs to have its confidence restored in the safety of flying. Federal control of the passenger screening process and greater oversight of other aspects of aviation security can get our aviation industries back on track. Anything less than a full Federal effort would be an abrogation of our duties as lawmakers.
There was a poll taken yesterday by ABC which I would like to refer to, ABC News.com. The question was: Are you worried traveling by airplane because of risk of terrorism? Forty-two percent of the American people today still are worried about traveling by airplane because of risk of terrorism.
There was a meeting in New York City the day before yesterday. According to the Wall Street Journal:
Lawmakers are eager to resolve the dispute partly because they are being told by business leaders and even Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan that airline security is central to restoring consumer confidence and getting the economy back on track. In a meeting at the New York Stock Exchange yesterday, about 20 executives urged Mr. Hastert and House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt of Missouri to take drastic action quickly. ``The consensus was that the whole system has to be federalized,'' one House aide said.
It is very clear that we need to act. I am very disappointed it has taken us a couple weeks before we could get this bill up on the floor of the Senate.
Senator Hollings and I would be more than happy to consider amendments, in addition to the present ones. I want to point out that there would be some added expense associated with increasing security, but I would also like to point out that security has obviously become paramount.
So, Mr. President, I again thank Senator Hollings, the chairman of the committee.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina, the chairman of the committee.
Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, the events of September 11 forever changed how we feel about the security of our world, our Nation, and our families. We are wrestling with tough issues here: Balancing safety and security--against convenience and the tradition of our free, open, and democratic society.
But one thing is clear. We need to make our skies safe. The American people deserve it--and they demand it.
Securing our skies is becoming a Federal responsibility that needs the full resources of Federal law enforcement, immigration services, and intelligence agencies. Making our skies safe is a complicated endeavor that we cannot leave just to the airlines and the private sector.
We do not contract out our Nation's defense or law enforcement to private security guards. Likewise, we must not contract out the security of our nation's skies or the vulnerable structures and people on the ground.
The American people are willing to contribute to the cost of making our skies safe. A recent poll of 900 people found that 68 percent of Americans are willing to pay $25 per airline ticket to increase security.
By those standards, airline passengers will find our plan to be quite a bargain.
I have worked closely with Senators McCain, Rockefeller, Hutchison, and many others in a bipartisan effort to fix what has been a long-
standing problem in aviation security. I believe the legislation we developed will close our current vulnerabilities and create new safeguards to stop those that would harm our American way of life.
Our legislation will professionalize the more than 18,000 screeners in our Nation's airports who are now employees of the airlines and private screening companies. We will give the screeners better training and advanced security equipment.
Our bill will increase the number of Federal Air Marshals on both international and domestic flights. It will enable the Transportation Department to deploy Federal Air Marshals on every flight.
Our legislation mandates cockpit doors and locks that cannot be opened during flight by anyone other than the pilots. The new cockpit doors will be able to withstand forced entry. With our pilots safe, they can better keep our nation's passengers safe.
These measures also will help restore Americans' confidence in the safety of our airlines. When passengers feel safe, they are more likely to fly, which will revitalize tourism in America--and the local economies that rely on it.
The terrorist attacks last month demonstrated that airline safety is an issue of national security. Other countries have had extraordinary success using the tactics called for in this legislation. Our American citizens deserve the same.
Mr. President, right to the point, let me thank Senator McCain, our ranking member, Senator Hutchison of Texas, who is the ranking member on our Aviation Subcommittee, and Senator Rockefeller. We have banded together in sort of an emergency situation.
Right to the point, a lot of this could be done, and should be done, and was to be done under present law. For example, you could get an order for securing the cockpit. I called the distinguished Secretary of Transportation 2 days after the 11th--on that Thursday--and I said: I am going to have a hearing. But do not wait for hearings. Let's secure that cockpit. You can order that immediately. You can order marshals.
Now, what have we seen? Three weeks after 9-11 we find a plane being apparently taken over on its way from Los Angeles to Chicago. The fellow was distraught and upset, mentally sick, but he charged the cockpit. So the cockpit was opened, and the pilot immediately called about a hijacking, and the passengers had to overpower him.
First, why weren't there marshals on that plane? We have an authority right now for marshals. What I am trying to say is, somehow, somewhere this administration has to work just as diligently--and they are to be commended on their diligence on correlating a coalition abroad--they have to correlate a coalition here in the country; and we have not done that.
This bill, in other words, is absolutely urgent because they seemingly want to wait for this intramural to work its way out with respect to the fixing of accountability and authority here. And that is what we are all for, in a bipartisan fashion agreed upon. We do not want to just hire a bunch of people. That isn't the problem. The problem is absolute security.
This war is not a military war. And the headlines are misleading: so many aircraft carriers; so many B-2 bombers; so many this; so many helicopters; so many that. The truth is, if you are going after terrorists who are spread amongst 50 countries--and they are zealots, they are fanatics--if you are going after them, you have to go on sort of an individual way; and it is an intelligence war.
Now, No. 1, if we had secured that cockpit, then you save the F-15 that was necessary. Are we going to have F-15s flying all over everyone's domestic flight; have military flights on top, domestic flights on the bottom? Is that America? Is that what we are going to have? Absolutely not.
So how do you forestall that? Secure the cockpit. But they have not done it. Boeing said within 2 weeks they could retrofit all the doors in their airplanes, until you get a steel or a kevlar door put on such as they have in Israel. But they are waiting on studying and studying and everything else.
Our first conference--I say this advisedly--dismayed me, when we conferred with the administration authorities on this particular bill. They were talking about its implementation 9 months to a year--can you imagine that--literally. That is what has gotten this Senator disturbed and exercised, along with the Senator from Arizona, about the urgency. We don't want to have F-15's and everybody in the Guard and everybody in the Air Force flying over all the domestic flights in America.
So you secure that cockpit and there is one thing they know: They are not going to run it into a building. And if it is a hijacking, that pilot doesn't open the door but he calls wherever he is going to land immediately, and have law enforcement there. You wipe out the expense and the calling up of the F-15 pilots and the expense of the F-15 planes.
These are the kinds of things that ought to be done immediately, but they are not being done. I am introducing and pressing for it on this bill. I don't want to have to agree to any set-aside for another bill. There is too much procedural intramurals going on. We have been agreeable, agreeable, agreeable.
And in that context, I guess I have to, with a smile, say I don't mind being a little disagreeable in order to get this one done.
I emphasize again the intelligence. Suppose you had someone and you were with the intelligence of one of these Middle East countries, be they Muslim or not, and you had information, you know it, whatever it is, but if you finger ``X'' on a watch list and know if it can get through now, that is the communications, it isn't high tech--high tech, everybody wants to get bam, bam, bam and you have the computer, and it immediately goes in. No. You have the Central Intelligence Agency not telling the FBI because they are afraid of a leak, and it will reveal their source.
I saw this 40 years ago when I served on the Hoover commission investigating the Central Intelligence Agency. That is just inherent. What you want to do is protect your sources. So do you give the information ahead and give it to unreliable sources and everything? While the FBI is absolutely reliable, certainly the screeners aren't, the ones we have. Everybody will agree to that. So you have to have high-tech personal, professional. It has to be a federalization where we can check these people, recheck them, not have any labor difficulties.
I supported President Reagan on the controllers. You can't have them striking and negotiating and everything else. This is a war of intelligence. The people at the airports, if they are going to stop would-be terrorists, have to be positioned to receive that watch list information. And they are not going to be giving it to them until our Government can guarantee they are secure. That is just bluntly put.
In that light, the President of the United States has to get in not whether we are going to get first the Amtrak, no; we have to do the seaports, no; we have to do benefits, no; we have to do counterterrorism and get into all of these procedural things. He has to tell the country to bug off, relax. You are not going to get a heck of a lot of information. I am your President. I have a team and we are working and if we can get this bin Laden fellow, you might know of it days or weeks afterwards. We might get him but we might not want to reveal how we got him for a period of time.
That is the kind of war we are in. You don't have to satisfy this media crowd and everything else like that that wants the story of the day, the headline. This is a war not to be run on the 7 o'clock news. They can relax, take weekend leave and everything else of that kind and, like the President says, go to Disney World. But forget about all this information to be had.
We need this bill. We can't tarry around. We need professionalism in it. It is not like the Israelis have, where intelligence is the outer rim, but it goes all the way down, as I have said before, to the person vacuuming the carpet in the middle of the aisle of the plane, because that person, with access to the plane itself, could put in a weapon like we found a bunch of these cardboard cutters and everything else of that kind, as we are finding in some other planes now on a diligent inspection.
My distinguished colleague from Texas is here. I will yield because she has been a leader for several years on this particular score. I am grateful for her leadership.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from South Carolina for all the work he has done. He is chairman of the Commerce Committee; I am the ranking member of the Aviation Subcommittee. We have worked very well together and crafted a bipartisan bill that would address the issues of aviation security.
As Senator McCain said earlier today, the people of our country are not going back to the airlines. This is causing a rippling effect throughout our economy. We need to stem the flow of job losses by getting the airlines back in business so the hotels will fill up, people will rent cars again and people will be able to go about their business in as normal a way as possible.
The last thing on Earth we want is to have the economy be so shaky that we are unable to gear up the national defenses that we know we need.
We have men and women putting their lives on the line as we speak for our country, for our freedom. For us not to do the right thing and get our country back on an even keel after this terrible incident of September 11 would be unthinkable. That is why all of us are working to come to an agreement on this bill.
We are 95 percent in agreement. There are a few issues on which we disagree. Most people know what these are. But what we cannot afford in this legislation is to put extraneous amendments on it. This is not the kind of bill that should be a Christmas tree where you have this amendment and that amendment and somebody's pet project. This is too important. This is aviation security for our country. It is for the people who are going to airports, people who are flying. People are afraid right now. I don't think they should be, because in all the flying I have done since September 11, and it has been every single weekend and also flying around during the weekend, I have been on a lot of flights that are half full. These flights were very safe. People are going all out to make flying safe.
The bottom line is, the people are not coming back. The planes are half full. It is going to take aviation security legislation to get us back on track.
We need to stop the process arguments. We need to stop the extraneous arguments. We need to say: I understand Senator Carnahan wanting her bill. I do understand that. It is a very important bill. At some point in the next few weeks, we will take up her bill. We will take up other kinds of legislation also. I want to support Amtrak security, but if it is not going to be agreed to totally, it is not going to go on this bill. I hope it can. But if it can't, then we are going to complete aviation security. That is the bottom line.
I am very pleased to work with Senator Hollings, Senator McCain, Senator Rockefeller, and many others who have taken the position that we must do aviation security.
What this bill is going to do is give us more air marshals. I introduced the bill for air marshals the week of September 11, but we still have not acted on adding air marshals. The President has done it on his own with emergency powers, but that is not an answer. We want a long-term solution. We want people to know there is a stable, seamless aviation security system in our country with air marshals, with screeners who are qualified, with supervisors who are qualified, all of which are law enforcement personnel. And we want to reinforce cockpit doors so that no pilot will have to worry about security in the cabin. The pilot should be focused on flying the airplane safely. We should not ask him to do anything else.
Now is the time to act. We need to finish this bill. I hope we can go to cloture right away. If we are going to go to cloture, let's do it tomorrow, or even tonight. Let's stay and finish all of the extraneous things and get on with this bill. We have legitimate disagreements. Let's get on with it and determine how much is going to be federalized. I have one position, and maybe someone else has a different position. Those are legitimate. Let's argue it, debate it, vote and go on.
The bottom line is that we are 95 percent in agreement; it is time to have aviation security for our country, for our citizens, and for our economy.
I thank the Senator from South Carolina. I yield the floor.
Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I may follow Senator Murray.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Chair recognizes the Senator from Washington.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I thank the chairman of the Commerce Committee for bringing this bill to the floor. Aviation security is a critical measure. I agree with the Senator that we have to do this right and we need to pass this bill. It is critical. It is critical to the American public that we bring this bill up, move it forward, and get it passed, and reassure our constituents in the country that air travel is safe because we have done our part as well.
I have come to the floor to speak on behalf of the more than 100,000 American workers who are now facing layoffs as a result of much of what has happened in the last month. For weeks, these workers have been waiting for this Senate to pass a workers assistance package, and today we finally have an amendment on the floor to help them. I have come to the floor to speak on behalf of that amendment and encourage its immediate passage.
For many of our workers, the clock is ticking. In fact, this Friday, 10,000 Boeing workers are going to receive notice that they are going to lose their jobs. They are very concerned about how they are going to feed their families, get health care, and how they are going to pay their mortgages. They need the Senate to take action.
Just look at the layoffs that have been announced so far. On September 15, United Airlines announced it was laying off 20,000 workers. On the same date, Continental announced it was laying off 12,000 workers. On September 17, US Airways announced it was laying off 11,000 workers. On September 18, the Boeing Company announced up to 30,000 layoffs. On September 19, American Airlines announced 20,000 layoffs. On September 26, Delta announced another 13,000 layoffs. These aren't just layoffs; these are people--people with families, people who are in our communities, people who are very frightened and insecure about their future. They are workers who are losing their jobs every day, and they need our help.
In my home State of Washington, we are really feeling the impact because of these layoffs in the aviation and aerospace industry. The Boeing Company plans to lay off 30,000 employees, as I said: That is 30 percent of its workforce. By the Christmas holiday season, I will have at least 10,000 of my constituents out of work. And it is not just Boeing; hundreds of suppliers across the Nation will be impacted as well.
The clock is ticking. This Congress has still not passed a workers assistance package. I urge my colleagues to support the Carnahan amendment so we can help those workers. Congress, as we all know, has taken care of the airlines by passing $15 billion in assistance. I supported that package because it was the right thing to do. Getting the airlines back up and running quickly helped us avoid further layoffs.
We have also recognized that we have a responsibility to help the many workers who are losing their jobs through no fault of their own. So far, this Congress has not provided any help for the 110,000 airline workers and their families who will be laid off or the 30,000 Boeing workers who will be laid off. These workers have to put food on the table; they need to make car payments and pay their rent or their mortgage. They are losing their jobs, and they need our help. The Carnahan amendment will help them.
In fact, these efforts are even more important today given the underlying problems we are having with the U.S. economy. Before September 11, our economy was teetering on the edge of recession. Unemployment is currently at 4.9 percent, and that is the highest level in over 4 years. Some economists are now predicting that unemployment will reach 6.5 percent by the middle of next year. Every one of us will have families in our States who will be impacted by this.
Even worse, these economic problems are affecting workers in all of the related industries, and we have heard from them--the travel agents, hotel and restaurant employees, caterers, car rental companies, and many more; the slide will keep moving. We are now working with the Senate and the House on a stimulus package that is intended to help our broader economy. Some predict the pricetag will be as high as $75 billion.
I want to make sure we meet the needs of the men and women, the moms and dads, who are facing layoffs right now. We need to adopt the Carnahan amendment to assist our displaced workers.
The amendment will provide an additional 20 weeks of cash payments to airlines and aircraft manufacturing employees who lost jobs directly as a result of September 11. For individuals who are laid off but who do not qualify for State unemployment assistance, our bill will provide unemployment benefits for 26 weeks. This will mean so much to those who are very worried about losing their homes and feeding their families in the coming weeks and months. Our amendment will also provide worker training benefits for laid-off employees and for those threatened by layoffs, so that they are better equipped and more confident and can find a new job as we see the economy and where it develops in coming years.
Finally, this amendment will provide 12 months of COBRA health insurance payments for our affected workers. This is really critical for our families who need to know that their loved ones are not losing their health care along with their jobs. No one in our country should live with that fear right now.
I urge my colleagues to adopt this much-needed amendment. The clock is ticking, and these workers facing layoffs cannot wait. We have to move forward and get these workers the help and give them the confidence they need now. I urge our colleagues to vote for this workers assistance package, to move the underlying bill and do what we need to do to get this economy back on track so that our country can be confident again.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senator from Minnesota is recognized.
Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I will be brief. I feel as though every day I have been speaking on the same issue. I think I am a cosponsor of the Hollings airline safety bill. It is a fine bill. I ask unanimous consent, in case I am not, to be a cosponsor of the Carnahan amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, first of all, I say to Senator Hollings I can do this in 1, 2, 3 order.
Senator Murray, I appreciate her statement. She has an awful lot of hard-pressed workers in her State. I appreciate her advocacy for working families in Washington.
To Senator Hollings, he has given enough speeches to deafen all the gods about how the industry gets back on its feet when people feel safe to fly, and aviation safety is the first priority. He is absolutely right, and this is a critically important piece of legislation. I look forward to passing it. We will have passed an important piece of legislation for our country.
Then the third point I want to make is that I heard the Senator from Texas--and I am sorry she is not here now, so I won't go into big debate. I heard her talk about the need to not have extraneous amendments, and then I heard her reference the Carnahan amendment. I will tell you something. The 4,500 Northwest employees who are out of work right now believe they are extraneous. They believe they are central--central to their families, central to our communities, central to Minnesota, and central to our country.
I would like to say to Senators who are opposed to this amendment or blocking this amendment, if you were to have a poll--I am just about positive of this--anywhere in the country and asked whether or not people think in addition to our helping the industry we ought to help employees, 90 percent of the people would say, ``Of course.'' Of course, you should help working families. You helped the industry; now you should help the employees and, of course, this should be a priority. As a matter of fact, one of the biggest criticisms--and there are not a lot of criticisms people have right now about what we are doing in the Congress--one of the criticisms is how can you bail out the industry and not help the employees? When I hear my colleagues say this is an extraneous amendment--tell that to the men, women, and children who are hurting right now.
We help people when they are flat on their backs. We provide the support to them. The Carnahan amendment does three things scaled down. I wish it was even more comprehensive, but it is extremely important. It extends the unemployment benefits, it provides the job training, and it provides--the Senator from Massachusetts is always the leader on health care issues--up to 12 months 100-percent payment of COBRA payments, which employees cannot afford when they are out of work otherwise.
This is a lifeline for these employees. It is extremely important. It is the right thing to do. Frankly, if this is the dividing line between Democrats and some Republicans, so be it. I would rather there be 100 Senators who are for this. I sure do not mind having a spirited debate about whether or not we should be helping these employees. I sure do not mind being on their side. That is what they expect from us.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
Mr. KERRY. I thank the Chair. Mr. President, it is somewhat extraordinary that so many weeks after the events of September 11, in the immediate days thereafter, almost all of the relevant personnel within the aviation industry--the people who fly the planes, the screeners, the people at the airports responsible for security, the flight attendants--all of them came forward and said we need a Federal system with Federal employees and Federal standards that guarantees the safety of our aircraft access and our airways.
Here we are, after this extraordinary outpouring of emotion and genuine bipartisanship within the Congress that came together to pass
$40 billion immediately, and that united to provide a clear statement of the will of the American people expressed through the Congress with regard to our reaction to those events in a series of measures on which we found the capacity to come to the floor of the Senate and vote as one, here we are now weeks later still procrastinating over when we are going to have a final vote, or how we are going to get to a final vote on the question of aviation security.
It seems to me extraordinary that at a moment when we are trying to prove to a lot of countries the virtues of democracy we are struggling in the greatest deliberative body on the face of the planet--as we are often referred to or even like to call ourselves--we are struggling to find the capacity to have a vote, to let the votes fall where they may. Let them fall where they may.
Some people do not like the Carnahan amendment. I am amazed that they would call extraneous assistance to people who went to work on one morning and found out a few hours later their jobs were gone. I wonder how one can call extraneous a flight attendants who got on a plane after the events of that day to help people get back to their homes or locations from where those planes flew, to return them, and then got home and found after taking that risk they got a pink slip, their job no longer existed.
Mr. President, 140,000 aviation employees have lost their jobs since September 11. How anybody can suggest that for those people who did not have the opportunity to plan for a layoff, for those people who did not have the savings put away because of these events that clearly altered their lives in such a dramatic way, that we are not going to find it in our capacity, even as we bail out the airlines to the tune of billions of dollars, that we somehow are not prepared to extend health care benefits to them by paying their COBRA premiums or making training available to them to find another job or find additional unemployment compensation once the State unemployment compensation has run out.
That is not extraneous. That is fundamental to who we are as a people and to the kind of reaction we ought to spontaneously summon as a consequence of the events that happened.
I also hear my colleagues talking about the need to have some kind of boost to the economy. We have had a rather sizable tax cut which enormously benefited those people at the upper end of the income scale, but for some 28, 29 million Americans who pay most of their taxes through the payroll tax, they did not get any break.
For a lot of Americans, the best way to begin to bring back the economy as fast as possible is to give people the ability to spend money, to give them the ability to pay their bills and do the things that people do which will have the most profound impact in terms of stimulus at this point in time.
For those who look at the tax cut side of the ledger--and we have all embraced those tax cuts over the course of the past months in one form or another--the fact is certain kinds of business tax incentives and certain kinds of monetary efforts--for instance, lowering the interest rates at this point in time--are simply not going to make a difference in the rapid restoration of the economy. We could lower the interest rates to zero at this moment and it is not going to affect the creation of a new plant or the investment in some new business where that business is already affected by an intense overhang of excess capacity. For somebody who built their plant in the last year and a half, of course, that has a negative effect.
What you have to do is use up that capacity. Most of that, most people would agree, is going to take place on the demand side and the consumer side, and we have to face that.
It seems to me, both as a matter of fairness and common sense about how we are going to deal with the economy under these circumstances, providing assistance under the Carnahan amendment is the proper way to address the needs of 140,000 people who were summarily thrown out of work as a direct consequence of the events that took place, and I might add not just as a direct consequence but also to some degree as a calculated effort by some of the airlines to position themselves differently from where they were positioned prior to September 11.
Every one of us on the Commerce Committee and on the Aviation Subcommittee, those of us who have been following this issue for a period of time, know the aviation industry was already a significant percentage off, maybe 30 percent and in some cases more, prior to September 10. What we are seeing now, even after we have taken taxpayer dollars and provided billions of dollars to help bail out the airline industry, they are reducing capacity and adjusting the numbers of flights and the number of personnel well beyond the impact of September 11.
So if it is okay and appropriate--and many of us believed it was--to help bail out that industry because of the impact that industry has on a whole set of other downstream industries: the car rental industry, the restaurant industry, hotel, entertainment, a lot of things are tied to getting people back into airplanes, at the same time as the health and long-term welfare of that industry is being sought, we ought to be looking at the health and long-term welfare of those employees who have suffered as a consequence of both of those linked facts.
I think it is critical we pass the Carnahan amendment, as a matter of fairness to those workers.
Let me also say something about the aviation bill itself. I have heard from a number of pilots who have privately contacted me in the course of the last weeks to tell me stories that have not necessarily reached the public about why it is so critical to have this national standard applied to our employees. When you walk up to any counter anywhere in the country and talk to the people who check you in and talk to them about why they think it is important, you will really gain a much stronger understanding of the virtue of having this national system of employees who are accountable to one standard, accountable across the country to one system, and who work with an esprit de corps and with an expertise that provides those people flying on our aircraft the sense of safety they both want and deserve.
I think most of us who have been following this issue for a long time are convinced it is only when you have that kind of system and not a sort of disparate, multiheaded effort that stems from the contracting out of various airports all across the country to the low bidders for those particular airports, we know that by virtue of the imperatives of the bottom line and the structure of the airlines themselves and the way in which that has been managed that there has been an incentive to find employees that do not cost a lot, that do not require a huge amount of training, do not require a huge amount of supervision because that costs a lot more money for airlines that have already been in difficult straits. Unless we raise the pay level of those employees, the training level, the supervisory level, and the standards to which they are supervised and under which they have to work, we are not going to have that kind of control.
Senator Hollings, again and again, has referred to El Al. El Al is a classic example of a security system that has escaped the kind of terror we witnessed on September 11. It does so because of the layered structure of government input that guarantees a standard which can be adhered to and which is accountable to those standards.
If we want to get people back in our airplanes to the levels they were previously and to even greater levels as we go down the road, we need to make certain we have the highest standards possible, the greatest accountability possible, and the broadest supervisory standards, with accountability, that we could put into place. The American people demand nothing more and they deserve nothing less.
Ultimately, if we are doing less than that, we leave ourselves open to the possibility that not in the next weeks--I do not believe that will happen in the next weeks or even the next months--but when people begin to relax a little bit, as is normal, when you begin to back off because you have these different companies and you do not have the kind of standardization that we are seeking, that is when someone will once again look to find the weakness in the system.
Even as we talk about the airlines, I want to reiterate what a number of us have said on a number of different occasions. It is not just the airlines that require standards with respect to security. Our trains are exposed and our buses, as we have seen, other forms of transportation. If we are truly in the kind of conflict we have described to the American people--and we are--and if indeed threats are possible down the road as we proceed forward--and they are--and all of us know that, then it behooves us to try to minimize the potential exposure to the American people with the maximum return in effectiveness.
We currently have the National Guard, the FBI, marshals. You walk into an airport today and you have this conglomerate of people who are there. Why? Because everybody knows what we have before them in terms of that screening system is inadequate. What we need to do is guarantee those marshals can be on the aircraft not waiting at a screening section; that the Guard can be doing what the Guard may be called on to do in the course of the next months; that the FBI and the other personnel can be following up on leads and preventing rather than guarding our airport entrances, and the only way we will ultimately have the kind of esprit de corps that we need is to build the supervisory capacity and supervision and accountability that we have within the INS, within the Border Patrol, the Coast Guard and all of those other security measures that we take at other levels.
I hope the Senate, within the next 24 hours, will finally vote on this legislation. I thank the Senator from Arizona and the Senator from South Carolina for their leadership on this on the Commerce Committee. I am pleased to be an original author and cosponsor with them of this legislation, but I am frustrated we cannot have a series of votes and let the votes fall where they may. If the Carnahan amendment deserves a majority of support from the Senate, then it should receive it. If it does not, then we move on, and we have a final vote on the question of aviation security. We need to get this done, and we need to get it done now. We should have had it done previously. I hope in the next hours the Senate will end this process of procrastination and restore the sense of unity and purpose and urgency that has guided us to this moment.
I yield the floor.
Mr. MILLER. Mr. President, I rise in support of Senator Carnahan's amendment regarding assistance for airline workers. As Senator Carnahan has described, her amendment would provide much needed help to workers in the airline industry who have been laid off as a result of the horrific events of September 11, and such help is desperately needed.
The need to help these workers is an issue that we failed to address when we gave $15 billion in aid to the airlines. Yet these airline workers need immediate temporary assistance in order to find new jobs. Delta Airlines, based in my home State of Georgia, has already cut 13,000 jobs. And this is not the end of the layoffs; many more Americans are going to be affected.
The approach to this problem outlined in Senator Carnahan's amendment is a measured and moderate one. It addresses only the most immediate needs of these workers: The need for unemployment benefits, the need for continued health insurance coverage, and the need for job training so that they can begin to again contribute to our Nation's economy. In addition, the benefits provided in this package are temporary; they in no way would be taking on permanent responsibility for a new group of Americans. Finally, the provisions of this amendment are narrowly crafted to apply only to those workers who lost their jobs as a direct result of the attacks of September 11 or due to security measures taken in response to the attacks. We would, therefore, not be providing assistance to those who are the victims of the general economic downturn.
In short, this is a sensible, middle-of-the-road approach to one the most pressing problems we face as a result of the September 11 attacks. It makes good sense to address this issue now, and I urge my colleagues to do so.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, the distinguished manager and I have a couple of amendments, if I could ask the indulgence of the Senator from Texas.
Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I ask that the pending Hollings-McCain amendment be considered agreed to and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, that the amendment be considered original text for the purpose of further amendments, and that the Daschle-Carnahan amendment 1855 remain in its current status as a first-degree amendment.
Mr. GRAMM. Reserving the right to object, I'm not sure I understand the unanimous consent request. Could you repeat it.
Mr. HOLLINGS. I ask consent that the pending managers' amendment, the Hollings-McCain amendment be considered agreed to and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, that the amendment be considered original text for the purpose of further amendments and that the Daschle-Carnahan amendment No. 1855 remain in its current status as a first-degree amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment (No. 1854) was agreed to.
Amendment No. 1857
Mr. HOLLINGS. I have an amendment on behalf of the Senator from Vermont, Senator Leahy, which I send to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the pending amendment is laid aside.
The clerk will report the amendment.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. Hollings], for Mr. Leahy, proposes an amendment numbered 1857.
Mr. McCAIN. I ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment be dispensed.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To amend title 49, United States Code)
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. ENCOURAGING AIRLINE EMPLOYEES TO REPORT SUSPICIOUS
ACTIVITIES.
(a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 449 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by inserting at the end the following:
``Sec. 44938. Immunity for reporting suspicious activities
``(a) In General.--Any air carrier or foreign air carrier or any employee of an air carrier or foreign air carrier who makes a voluntary disclosure of any suspicious transaction relevant to a possible violation of law or regulation, relating to air piracy, a threat to aircraft or passenger safety, or terrorism, as defined by section 3077 of title 18, United States Code, to any employee or agent of the Department of Transportation, the Department of Justice, any Federal, State, or local law enforcement officer, or any airport or airline security officer shall not be civilly liable to any person under any law or regulation of the United States, any constitution, law, or regulation of any State or political subdivision of any State, for such disclosure.
``(b) Application.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to--
``(1) any disclosure made with actual knowledge that the disclosure was false, inaccurate, or misleading; or
``(2) any disclosure made with reckless disregard as to the truth or falsity of that disclosure.
``Sec. 44939. Sharing security risk information
``The Attorney General, in consultation with the Deputy Secretary for Transportation Security and the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, shall establish procedures for notifying the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration, and airport or airline security officers, of the identity of persons known or suspected by the Attorney General to pose a risk of air piracy or terrorism or a threat to airline or passenger safety.''.
(b) Report.--Not later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall report to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and the Judiciary Committees of the Senate and the House of Representatives on the implementation of the procedures required under section 44939 of title 49, United States Code, as added by this section.
(c) Chapter Analysis.--The chapter analysis for chapter 449 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by inserting at the end the following:
``44938. Immunity for reporting suspicious activities.
``44939. Sharing security risk information.''.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I am pleased that the Senate will accept my amendment to improve aircraft and passenger safety by encouraging airlines and airline employees to report suspicious activities to the proper authorities.
In addition, this amendment requires the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation to share security risk information with the Federal Aviation Administration and airport or airline security officers.
I want to commend Senator Hollings and Senator McCain for their good work on this airport security legislation. I support the Hollings-
McCain Aviation Security Act and believe this amendment improves an already excellent bill.
The Leahy amendment provides civil immunity for airlines and airline employees who report information on potential violations of law relating to air piracy, threats to aircraft or passenger safety, or terrorism to the Department of Justice, Department of Transportation, a law enforcement officer, or an airline or airport security officer.
This civil immunity would not apply to any disclosure made with actual knowledge that the disclosure was false, inaccurate or misleading or any disclosure made with reckless disregard as to its truth or falsity.
In other words, this amendment would not protect bad actors.
According to press reports, two of the suspected September 11, 2001, terrorists were on an FBI watch list. Both the Secretary of Transportation and the Attorney General, however, testified before Congress that the FBI, the INS, and the Department of Justice do not currently supply these watch lists to the FAA or to the Nation's airline carriers to match up passenger lists with potential threat lists.
It is time for that policy to change. This amendment requires the Attorney General to establish procedures for notifying the FAA of the identity of known or suspected terrorists.
Monday's Wall Street Journal reported that the National Commission on Terrorism has stressed the importance of more effective coordination and dissemination of security information including the FBI's watch list of potential terrorists and their associates.
Indeed, the Wall Street Journal reported:
A government-created task force recommended ways to plug what historically has been one of the most glaring loopholes in aviation security: a lack of clear-cut procedures to circulate timely information about potential threats to airlines and airports.
My amendment will put those needed procedures into place by requiring the Attorney General, in consultation with the Deputy Secretary for Transportation Security, which is created in the underlying bill, and the Director of the FBI, to establish procedures to notify the FAA and airport or airline security officers, of the identity of persons known or suspected to pose a risk of air piracy or terrorism or a threat to airline or passenger safety.
Finally, the amendment requires the Attorney General to report to Congress on the implementation of the procedures to identify these suspected or known hijackers or terrorists.
I believe the Leahy amendment will improve aircraft and passenger safety and provide the flying public with greater security. Indeed, this amendment has the support of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce among others.
I thank Senator Hollings and Senator McCain for accepting this amendment.
I ask unanimous consent that this article from the Wall Street Journal, entitled, ``U.S. Task Force Proposes Ways For Sharing Security-Risk Data With Airlines, Airports,'' be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:
U.S. Task Force Proposes Ways for Sharing Security-Risk Data With
Airlines, Airports
(By Andy Pasztor)
A government-created task force recommended ways to plug what historically has been one of the most glaring loopholes in aviation security: a lack of clear-cut procedures to circulate timely information about potential threats to airlines and airports.
The recommendations submitted to Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta urge, among other things, creation of a
``federal security agency'' that would ``fundamentally'' improve integration of ``law enforcement and national security intelligence data.''
The proposed entity, supported in concept by the White House as well as congressional leaders, would be responsible for directly passing on such threat information to senior security personnel at each airline and airport. Officials of the Federal Aviation Administration have acknowledged that they only received partial information from the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
``We have access to the names that the FBI gives us,'' but don't ``normally have access'' to the full ``watch list'' of potential terrorists or their associates assembled by the bureau, U.S. immigration officials and other law enforcement agencies, Monte Belger, the FAA's acting deputy administrator, told lawmakers last month.
Despite extensive debate over giving the FAA access to certain intelligence data, there was no resolution of that issue prior to Sept. 11. After the attacks, the FAA instituted some makeshift security procedures. Before any commercial jetliner can take off, airlines must check the names of all passengers against a lengthy and continuously updated ``watch list'' of names supplies by the FBI.
Paul Bremer, chairman of a blue-ribbon government panel called the National Commission on Terrorism, has stressed the importance of more effective coordination and dissemination of security information.
Since the FBI ``is in charge of catching criminals and prosecuting them,'' historically it has had some reluctance to quickly pass on potential evidence to the FAA or airlines.
``Part of the problem in the FBI is a cultural one,'' Mr. Bremer has said, adding ``we need to find a way [such information] can be disseminated'' more rapidly and predictably.
But in certain of its conclusions, the task force also appears to have been keenly interested in trying to minimize delays.
Citing ``an urgent need'' to find more efficient methods of moving people through the security system as passenger volume ramps up, the panel recommended ``a nationwide program for the voluntary prescreening of passengers.'' By issuing frequent travelers special credentials or checking their identities and backgrounds before they arrive at the airport, such travelers would be subjected to less scrutiny. That would allow security personnel to focus extra attention on other passengers. Meanwhile, a companion task force appointed by Mr. Mineta to recommend changes in onboard security systems stopped short of supporting some concepts previously proposed by the White House.
Members of this task force said ``while there may be value'' in installing video cameras designed to show pilots' activity in the cabin, ``we have no consensus on whether to proceed with this technology.'' The panel concluded that calls by President Bush to install double doors to cockpits were premature. Such a ``design will have limited applicability to most aircraft in the U.S. fleet'' partly because there isn't enough room between the current door and the flight deck to accommodate such a system, the task force concluded.
Mr. HOLLINGS. The amendment is agreed to on both sides.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment of the Senator from Vermont, Mr. Leahy.
The amendment (No. 1857) was agreed to.
Amendment No. 1858
Mr. HOLLINGS. On behalf of the distinguished Senator from Nevada, Senator Ensign, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. Hollings], for Mr. Ensign, proposes an amendment numbered 1858.
Mr. McCAIN. I ask unanimous consent reading of the amendment be dispensed.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To permit the Secretary of Transportation to appoint retired law enforcement officers to serve as air marshals)
At the appropriate place in the section relating to air marshals, insert the following subsection:
( ) Authority To Appoint Retired Law Enforcement Officers.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of Transportation may appoint an individual who is a retired law enforcement officer or a retired member of the Armed Forces as a Federal air marshal, regardless of age, if the individual otherwise meets the background and fitness qualifications required for Federal air marshals.
Mr. HOLLINGS. We agree with the amendment.
Mr. McCAIN. If we could withhold for 30 seconds to describe the amendment of Senator Ensign, it allows retired law enforcement officers or retired armed forces personnel to serve as Federal air marshals if the individual meets the background and fitness qualifications. I think this is a good amendment that will provide some highly qualified, trained and experienced individuals. I urge its adoption.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 1858) was agreed to.
Mr. McCAIN. I move to reconsider the vote by which the amendment was agreed to.
Mr. HOLLINGS. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. GRAMM. Mr. President, it is my understanding, we now have of the underlying bill the Carnahan amendment, which is a first-degree amendment; is that correct?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas is correct.
Amendment No. 1859 to Amendment No. 1855
Mr. GRAMM. I send a second-degree amendment to the desk and ask for its consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Texas [Mr. Gramm] proposes an amendment numbered 1859 to amendment No. 1855.
Mr. GRAMM. I ask unanimous consent reading of the amendment be dispensed.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(The text of the amendment is printed in today's Record under
``Amendments Submitted.)
Mr. GRAMM. I'm not going to spend a lot of time tonight talking about this amendment. We will have an opportunity to talk about it tomorrow. However, I do want to try to make a couple of points tonight.
First, I want to make a point we are trying to pass a bill on aviation security. In my opinion, this bill is far from perfect. It seems to me there are 100 Members in the Senate who believe we need to do everything we can do to act quickly and act efficiently in making air transportation safe again. We want the American people to be and feel secure and we want to get planes flying. Our economy is very much affected by the ability of Americans to travel, and in the process, to go about their business, because the business of America is business.
We now have a pending amendment, the Carnahan amendment, that has nothing to do with aviation security. I know some of my colleagues will argue that the amendment is meritorious. I have been somewhat amazed by the argument that we took action to ``bail out'' the airlines, and now it is time we do something for the employees of the airlines. I beg to differ. For the last 140 years, the distribution of resources in the American economy has been roughly 80 percent for labor and 20 percent for capital. There is no reason to believe that of the $5 billion of assistance we provided to give emergency relief for the limitations placed on the airlines on the 11th and the ensuing weeks, that approximately 80 percent of that money did not go directly to the benefit of people who worked for the airlines. In fact, the whole purpose of the funding was to prevent weak airlines from going broke and to try to stabilize the situation.
Now to come back and say we need another bill dealing with special benefits for people who work for airlines, it seems to me, approaches piling on. Quite frankly, I don't understand the logic that if you work for an airline, and I work for a travel agent, and we are both out of work, why you are more deserving of Federal benefits than I am. I don't understand the logic that treats people differently in unemployment compensation, and to carry over their benefits based on who they work for. That system makes no sense whatever to me.
I think it is important to note that the Carnahan amendment, at least by my rough and rugged calculations, would cost $95 billion a year if the same benefits were applied to everybody in the American economy, rather than simply being applied to people who work for airlines.
To sum up the points I want to make about the Carnahan amendment: One, people who work for airlines were the principle beneficiary of the
$5 billion of direct aid and the $10 billion of loan guarantees. The whole objective was to try to keep airlines operating so they could provide service and so that employees would not be dislocated economically by losing their jobs. I don't understand the logic of an amendment that treats people who work for one private employer differently than people who work for other private employers, even though both may have lost their job as a result of what happened on the 11th.
I am not for the Carnahan amendment. I don't make any excuses for being opposed to it. I think it is bad policy. And quite frankly in this era of bipartisanship it looks awfully partisan to me. It seems to me since the decision has been made that we are going to offer extraneous amendments on the Aviation Security Act, both sides can play that game. My amendment is a straightforward amendment that opens up 2,000 acres of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for oil and gas production. In the process, it adds more oil reserves to America's proven reserves than 30 years of supply from Saudi Arabia. It would require the use of the best available technology for environmental protection. The provision has been adopted by a fairly substantial bipartisan vote in the House of Representatives.
One might ask, what does energy security have to do with the Aviation Security Act? My answer is it has a lot more to do with the Aviation Security Act than the Carnahan amendment. If we are going to vote on extraneous amendments that our Democrat colleagues want to vote on, then I want to vote on amendments that I think will benefit the country.
Quite frankly, I think nothing could do more to immediately bolster national security than enabling us to produce more oil and gas here at home at a price consumers can afford to pay to turn the wheels of energy and agriculture. So I wanted to come over today and offer this amendment.
Finally, let me reiterate, before I yield the floor and let our colleagues speak, my concerns about the Aviation Security Act. I think 100 Members are in favor of doing something here. But I think we should be trying to do something within two constraints: No. 1, how can we provide additional airport and aviation security in a way that will minimize the amount of time it takes to put it in place? And, No. 2, how can we do it in such a way as to maximize the effectiveness of the security we provide?
I personally believe we would have been well advised and the country would have been well served if we had allowed the President, in implementing this program, to decide when to use Government employees and when to use employees from the private sector and to pick and choose in such a way as to implement a program as quickly as possible that would be as effective as possible.
I think we have made a mistake by mandating that the people who are employed under this act in our major airports all be Federal employees. It seems to me that will add to the amount of time it takes to put the program in effect, and I think it is highly questionable that that kind of binding constraint on the executive branch of Government is aimed at making the system the most efficient possible.
I think we could have written a better bill had we allowed the President to do this within the two constraints of doing it as quickly as possible and having a system that is as effective as possible. The decision was made not to do that, to move ahead even though the President expressed a preference to have flexibility. The decision was made to move ahead by mandating Government employees.
I think that is not good public policy. I am not saying we would not be better off having a bill that is non-optimal than not having a bill. But I am simply saying, in this spirit of bipartisanship, it seems to me that the right way to have done this would have been to trust the President and give him the flexibility. That the bill did not do.
So in yielding the floor, let me reiterate where we are. We now have the underlying substitute as the pending bill. We have a first-degree amendment, the Carnahan amendment, and we have a second-degree amendment which would open a very limited area of ANWR, 2,000 acres. It would add to the oil reserves of the country the equivalent of 30 years of Saudi Arabian imports. And it would require that this oil and gas be produced with the best available technology.
I am sure Senator Murkowski will speak about why this is something we should do, as the former chairman of the Energy Committee, if we are in fact going to consider the Carnahan amendment. Let me say if we simply decide to focus, as I believe we should, on aviation security, if we should decide to drop the Carnahan amendment, I would be willing to pull down this amendment. But if we are going to deal with extraneous matters, then we ought to be dealing with extraneous matters, in my opinion, that are more related to the crisis we face than is the Carnahan amendment.
So if we are going to press ahead with that amendment, then I am going to press ahead with voting on ANWR. I understand the rules of the Senate. The majority leader has filed cloture on the Carnahan amendment. I will vote against cloture. I hope cloture will be denied. But if cloture is adopted, then my amendment to the Carnahan amendment will fall. But I will offer it again as a first-degree amendment.
I want to reiterate, if we are going to get in this business of dealing with extraneous amendments, which I think is a mistake--I think under the circumstances that, on a united basis, we ought to move ahead with aviation security--but if we are going to get into these extraneous amendments, then I think everybody ought to have the right to get into them. I cannot imagine anything that would be more important that we could do tomorrow on the floor of the Senate than to adopt a House-passed provision that, on a very limited basis, would open ANWR and would add more proven oil reserves to the Nation than 30 years' supply from Saudi Arabia.
I appreciate the Chair's indulgence and I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I welcome the opportunity to join with Senator Carnahan in urging the Senate to provide some important relief for workers and workers' families whose loss of jobs were directly related to the terrible terrorist attacks which took place here earlier in September.
I think all Americans have been struck by a variety of different emotions in these recent weeks. I absolutely found them inspiring, almost beyond description in so many different ways. Obviously, the extraordinary loss of life was breathtaking in its scope and its impact on so many families. But we saw absolutely extraordinary heroism by many individuals who never, probably, considered themselves to be heroes or heroines. I think that has been emblazoned on the minds of people all over this country, and really all over this world. It will be a proud part of our Nation's character and history.
Something else we have seen is extraordinary acts of generosity towards our fellow citizens. Americans are a generous people. I think all of us have seen, in small, personal ways as well as in large ways, the scope of these contributions to the Red Cross, the contributions of blood, doctors running down to hospitals--so many different acts of generosity. That really is the background of the time we are meeting. It is true of the time we are meeting here this evening.
In the immediate wake of the tragedy, this institution responded to the challenge to our transportation system, our airline transportation system. In a very short period of time, because of the nature of the emergency, because there had been direct governmental intervention, where airlines were closed down, we took action in order to try to provide some relief to that industry. We took those steps, and we are very hopeful they will be enough to make sure that industry will continue to play an important role in our national economy.
Now we took care of management during those actions. They are going to make sure their salaries are going to be paid. The management of the airline industry was taken care of, some of them in extremely generous ways. But we believed at the time we had to take that kind of action.
Now what are we being asked to do under the Carnahan amendment? All we are saying is, fair is fair. We have taken care of the management in the airline industry, we have taken care of the airline industry, now we are talking about being fair to the workers in the industry. Fair is fair. The American people understand fairness. That is what the Carnahan amendment is basically all about. It is reflected in unemployment insurance, COBRA assistance and training. But it is about fairness.
Those workers include the reservation personnel, customer service personnel, flight attendants, baggage handlers, mechanics who fix the planes, the workers who clean the planes, the food service workers, the shuttle drivers--you could go on and on.
One hundred and twenty thousand of them have been thrown out of work--not because of their failure to perform good services, not because they were not working hard, and not because they weren't producing, but because of terrorist acts. On the one hand, we have taken care of management. The Carnahan amendment says we are now going to try to take care of the limited group, the workers. Fair is fair. Americans understand it. We are using the first vehicle to be able to do it. Some of us would have preferred that we did it at the time of the airline action, but so many of the voices that are opposed to this tonight said: Oh, no. We can't do that now. We shouldn't do that at this moment. We have to look out for the airlines. When we bring it up, they say: No. It is an extraneous matter.
Americans understand what is happening. More than 120,000 of these workers expect someone to speak for them. And the someone who is speaking for them will be the Members of Congress, the Senate, in a bipartisan way, I might add, with this amendment. In a bipartisan way we are going to speak for those workers.
That is what this debate and discussion is all about. Let us get to the business of voting on this measure. Let's get to the business of completing the action on airport security. Then let us go ahead and deal finally, hopefully, in the next 2 weeks with the economic package to look after other workers who are also suffering.
I am always interested when I listen to voices on the other side complain about unemployment insurance. We should really understand that workers have already indirectly paid into the unemployment compensation. Do we understand that? Workers pay into unemployment compensation. I am not sure how much management paid in and how much they paid at the time that we took care of the airline industry. And I voted for it and I support it. But we are talking about a major aspect of this program being extended unemployment compensation. Workers pay into unemployment compensation over a long period of time. Because we have been blessed with a strong economy, with strong price stability, economic growth, and low inflation, there has not been the necessity for unemployment compensation. But it is part of the safety net that has been accepted and supported in our society.
I know there are people who are opposed to that in this body as well, and continue to be opposed to it. But it is there. Workers pay into it. They need it. They need it at a time such as this when they have lost their jobs. This is a very modest program. It is unemployment compensation where workers receive a small percentage of what they otherwise would have received had they been able to retain their jobs. It helps them to maintain health insurance.
All of us understand the dangers. Every family understands the dangers if they lose their health insurance and what kind of additional pressure that puts on the families. For lower income families, it helps them in terms of buying into Medicaid--a very modest program in terms of the training for those who understand, as the persons did whom I talked with last night in Boston. They had been laid off when Eastern Airlines collapsed. They are now laid off by US Airways. They said they were going to try as people in their middle years to take the training programs that are out there to try to find a different sector. They just believe they have to start in a new area and a new career.
I look forward to the vote. The American people know this is relevant. It is absolutely essential. They can understand when you take care of the management, as we have, and take care of the industry, that workers have been a part of that whole process. If it had not been for those terrorist attacks, probably 95 percent of those workers would have been working either today, tonight, or tomorrow. As a direct result of that attack, these individuals have lost their livelihood.
The question is whether we are going to be responsive in a measured, modest way that will permit them to at least hold their families together for a short period of time until they can either find the training or be recalled to work. That is the least we can do for working families in this country.
I hope cloture will be obtained on this particular amendment.
The airline industry suffered enormously in the September 11 terrorist attacks. Congress has already made billions of dollars in federal relief available to the airlines. And now it is time for us to give urgently needed relief to the thousands of airline workers who have also been financially devastated by this tragedy.
The men and women who worked for the airlines and airports deserve our help today. We know that layoffs in the airline industry alone are expected to total about 120,000 workers. American Airlines and United have each announced layoffs of 20,000 workers. Continental, Delta, Northwest, and US Airways have each announced layoffs of more than 10,000 workers. Workers with smaller airlines have been hit even harder. Spirit has laid off 30 percent of its workforce while ATA is laying off about 20 percent of its workers.
We need to do more for workers like Penny Bloomquist of Minnesota. She was just laid off from her dream job as a flight attendant for Northwest Airlines. After working a range of different jobs while raising her children, Ms. Bloomquist sacrificed mightily to enroll in Northwest's six-day a week training program. Instead of living her dream today, she is instead selling off many of her belongings.
The Carnahan-Kennedy amendment will provide much-needed relief for Ms. Bloomquist and thousands of workers like her. Extended unemployment insurance benefits, job training benefits, and health care coverage will be available to airline workers, for workers who build our airplanes, and for airport workers, including airline food service employees. Only those workers who lost their jobs as a direct result of the attacks of September 11 or security measures taken in response to the attacks will be eligible for these benefits.
Fair is fair. Congress treated the airlines fairly, and now we must treat the workers fairly. Tens of thousands of other airline employees deserve unemployment insurance benefits. They deserve job training assistance. They deserve fair health care coverage, and they deserve it as soon as possible.
Under our amendment, workers who have exhausted their 26-week eligibility for state unemployment insurance would be eligible for additional weeks of cash payments funded entirely by the federal government.
This amendment will also provide unemployment insurance benefits to airline workers who are not currently eligible for state unemployment benefits. Workers who do not meet their State's requirements for unemployment insurance would receive 26 weeks of federally financed unemployment insurance.
The amendment will provide job training benefits to get people back to work. Workers who are not expected to return to their jobs in the airline industry will be eligible for retraining benefits. Other workers who are not expected to return to their original jobs, but who may find some alternative job in the airline industry, will be eligible for training to upgrade their skills.
Our amendment will also provide health care benefits to laid off airline and airport workers. Too often families cannot afford to pay to continue their health coverage after layoffs. They are forced to choose between health care and other basic family needs. In fact, almost 60 percent of the uninsured today have lost their job in the past year.
For airline workers who are currently covered under their employer's health plan, the federal government will reimburse 100 percent of their COBRA health care premiums. Workers who did not receive health care through their employers will be eligible for Medicaid, with the federal government covering 100 percent of the premiums.
We also need to do more for workers in other industries--especially the travel, tourism, hospitality, and restaurant industries that have been hit so hard. Last week, the Labor Department announced that unemployment claims climbed to the highest level in nine years. New claims for unemployment increased by 71,000 to a total of more than 528,000 in just one week.
Relief for these workers must be a significant part of the economic stimulus legislation that Congress will soon take up. These workers have lost their jobs with little, if any, severance pay, and little, if any, health insurance. We cannot abandon these workers and their families.
These attacks have also jeopardized the nation's overall economic health. In New York City alone, the overall cost of the World Trade Center attack could be as much as $105 billion over the next two years. Nationally, the Department of Commerce recently reported our worst quarter of economic growth in over 8 years.
Expanding Unemployment Insurance is one of the most effective ways to get our economy moving again. Unemployed workers have to spend every penny just to feed their families and pay their rent. So, for every dollar we give to unemployed workers, we expand the economy by more than $2.15. We must do all that we can to strengthen our economy.
Helping workers during a slowing economy is good economic policy. The unemployment insurance system will be critical to the nation's recovery and economic strength.
Historically, Congress has ensured extended benefits for each recession since the 1950s. Surely as we face this national crisis we should do the same for today's workers. If we act soon to provide extended benefits nationally, we will avoid the mistakes of the early 1990s. At that time, we waited the better part of a year to act. At the same time, hundreds of thousands of workers exhausted their benefits.
This time must be different. We need to act now. Not only will millions of workers be directly helped financially, but according to a recent study commissioned by the Department of Labor, unemployment insurance with the federally extended benefits reduces the number of workers who become unemployed. By improving and extending unemployment insurance, history shows that we will have a shorter, less severe recession.
Good unemployment benefits will help workers bridge the gap between jobs, and put money in their hands. Unemployed workers will spend these unemployment benefits, rather than save them. If fact, the DOL study concluded that unemployment insurance, with its extended benefits, mitigates 15 percent of the loss of GDP that otherwise would occur during a recession. We need this stimulus for the economy.
Every day we delay, more workers suffer. Working men and women are waiting for this help. We owe it to them to act, and we will have the chance to do just that one the economic stimulus legislation that we soon take up.
The issue before us now is relief for airlines workers. A strong airline industry is critical to the national economy. We need to keep the airlines flying--but we also must provide critical assistance for the airline workers who lost their jobs, and now is the time to do that.
I urge my colleagues to stand up for airline workers by passing the Carnahan-Kennedy amendment to give these workers the genuine relief they need.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington is recognized.
Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I came down to the floor this evening to reiterate the comments of my friend from Missouri, Senator Carnahan, and the comments that the Senator from Massachusetts, Mr. Kennedy, made in expressing the frustration about the lack of progress on the aviation security bill and the need to immediately consider worker assistance in this amendment.
We have spent a week now simply on the motion to proceed to consideration of one of the most important bills that we need to pass this year. Every day that we wait, critical measures to enhance the American public's confidence in the aviation system are not enacted--
and, thus, economic activity dependent on this sector is not generated.
We have no time to waste. The issues that divide us are not terribly far apart. Like my colleague from Missouri, I don't want to slow this bill down. I had wanted to see both the security provisions and the worker assistance dealt with during the consideration of the airline assistance package that we passed several weeks ago. But people told us to wait, and do it after we pass that package.
So I think it's time that we all step back and reflect on the importance of these measures. I call on my colleagues to reconsider these differences that remain and get down to actual consideration of this bill, and the Carnahan amendment.
I would like to thank Senators Hollings and McCain for putting together an aviation security measure that will give this country the confidence to fly again. In the wake of the September 11 attacks, Senators Hollings and McCain began to work on this package immediately.
The package they put together I call on my colleagues to support:
First, it expands the air marshal program, improves passenger-
screening requirements in our airports, and provides for hijacking training of flight crews.
It requires more background checks for flight school students, strengthens cockput security, and increases perimeter security at our Nation's airports.
And, it will bring the passenger screening function under Federal control, something I believe is a necessity for restoring public confidence that a well trained, well paid, and more integrated security workforce is on duty at airports in every corner of this Nation.
We have a long way to go in bringing the passengers back, but I am confident they will come back.
I would like to thank Senators Carnahan, Kennedy, and Majority Leader Daschle for their hard work on this legislation, particularly their effort to include airline worker assistance. It is a strong first step in easing the blow to workers in the aviation industry who will be greatly impacted.
I appreciate my colleagues' leadership on this issue and their willingness to include aircraft manufacturing workers who are about to suffer the severe impacts of others in the industry. We should have done this 2 weeks ago. That is why we cannot afford to wait.
The Carnahan amendment will help thousands of families who are facing economic turmoil. These are people who are suddenly left holding numerous household bills that they will soon be unable to pay. They have mortgages, car payments, credit card debt, utility bills, and school loans. What thousands of them won't have much longer is a job.
Major U.S. airlines expect to cut more than 100,000 jobs this year alone and tens of thousands have already received pink slips. The September 11 attacks affected all of us very deeply. We should think about the individuals who have directly lost their economic security as a result of these events.
In my State, the Boeing Company recently announced it will be forced to lay off 20,000 to 30,000 workers by the end of 2002. Those are just numbers of direct jobs that will be lost in the airline and aircraft manufacturing industries. The overall economic toll will be far greater.
For Boeing workers, notices will be sent on October 12--just 2 days from now--to inform them that in 60 days they will be out of a job. So that means that on December 14--less than 2 weeks before Christmas--a significant number of workers in my State are going to be jobless.
While dealing with how to meet their bills, the average Boeing worker who elects to continue to try to cover their health care coverage--
their family medical and dental--will have to pay nearly $850 per month. That is $850 a month on top of other bills that unemployed workers are going to have to face.
These layoffs will certainly mean hardship for thousands of individual families, but they will also create a serious economic ripple effect in my State--the State of Washington--and nationwide.
The Seattle Times recently reported that the Boeing layoffs alone will take $1.76 billion out of the economy in regions of the country where the layoffs occur. More than 70 percent of those layoffs are expected to happen in Washington, which means a loss of $1.29 billion to our region's economy.
The economy is already reacting with uncertainty resulting from the many layoffs and the fear of layoffs. Consumer spending currently accounts for two-thirds of our economy. Yet consumer confidence in September fell to its lowest level since January of 1996. We can take a step--a giant step--in shoring up consumer confidence if we let the workers in the most impacted sector know, by passing this legislation, that they will not fall through the cracks.
The fact is, unless we do something to instill greater consumer confidence in the aviation system, it will be difficult to sustain our larger economic growth. That is why it is so important that we act now.
Our economy works best when people are working. When they lose their jobs, they need help to manage their unemployment, train for new jobs, and make an easy transition to new careers. This amendment will provide the financial assistance, job training, and health care coverage for thousands of workers in the airline and aircraft manufacturing industries--workers who are losing their jobs as a result of terrorism.
The time to provide the workers relief is now, and in this bill. We have already provided, as many of my colleagues have said, the airline industry with billions of dollars to keep them flying. That was the right thing to do to bolster the economy and to maintain as many jobs as possible, but the workers who are the heart of the industry deserve equal treatment, and that includes the workers in the airline manufacturing industry.
We cannot take care of the corporate needs and shareholder needs and not the needs of American workers who are the backbone of our economy. Our economy was built by their muscle and their minds, and it is a product of their hard work and creativity that continues to drive us.
We cannot allow terrorism to transform our economy from a rising tide that can lift all boats into a rising storm that threatens to capsize American workers. We need to provide them with a lifeline to health care coverage, unemployment benefits, and job training.
Again, I call on my colleagues to support the Carnahan amendment and the overall airline security legislation. America is watching us and asking us to act now on both of these measures.
I yield the floor, Mr. President.
Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to set aside the pending Carnahan amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.
Amendment No. 1860
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of Senator Snowe of Maine and ask for its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
The senior assistant bill clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Arizona [Mr. McCain], for Ms. Snowe, proposes an amendment numbered 1860.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To authorize national emergency powers of the Deputy
Secretary for Transportation Security)
On page 5, line 13, strike the closing quotation marks and the second period.
On page 5, between lines 13 and 14, insert the following:
``(3) National emergency responsibilities.--Subject to the direction and control of the Secretary, the Deputy Secretary shall have the following responsibilities:
``(A) To coordinate domestic transportation during a national emergency, including aviation, rail, and other surface transportation, and maritime transportation
(including port security).
``(B) To coordinate and oversee during a national emergency the transportation-related responsibilities of other departments and agencies of the Federal Government other than the Department of Defense and the military departments.
``(C) To establish uniform national standards and practices for transportation during a national emergency.
``(D) To coordinate and provide notice to other departments and agencies of the Federal Government, and appropriate agencies of State and local governments, including departments and agencies for transportation, law enforcement, and border control, about threats to transportation during a national emergency.
``(E) To carry out such other duties, and exercise such other powers, relating to transportation during a national emergency as the Secretary of Transportation shall prescribe.
``(4) Relationship to other transportation authority.--The authority of the Deputy Secretary under paragraph (3) to coordinate and oversee transportation and transportation-related responsibilities during a national emergency shall not supersede the authority of any other department or agency of the Federal Government under law with respect to transportation or transportation-related matters, whether or not during a national emergency.
``(5) Annual report.--The Deputy Secretary shall submit to the Congress on an annual basis a report on the activities of the Deputy Secretary under paragraph (3) during the preceding year.
``(6) National emergency.--The Secretary of Transportation shall prescribe the circumstances constituting a national emergency for purposes of paragraph (3).''.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, this is a national emergency responsibilities amendment, where the Deputy Secretary will have responsibilities for coordination amongst various agencies. I think it is a good amendment, and I urge its adoption.
Mr. HOLLINGS. I urge the adoption of the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate?
Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
The amendment (No. 1860) was agreed to.
Mr. McCAIN. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. HOLLINGS. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I do not see any more pending business, so pending the appearance of the majority leader or the whip, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, will the Senator withhold suggesting the absence of a quorum?
Mr. McCAIN. I withhold.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina is recognized.
Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I ask colleagues to find out the disposition of the leadership and how they want to wrap up because we are ready to go. But pending that, I will say a word about another concern I have.
(The remarks of Mr. Hollings are printed in today's Record under
``Morning Business.'')
Mr. HOLLINGS. I see the distinguished Senator from New York is here. I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New York.
Mrs. CLINTON. I thank the chairman of the committee who has done such a tremendous job of leadership in the wake of the terrible attacks of September 11. I commend him and the ranking member, the distinguished Senator from Arizona, and thank them for their tireless work and their constant reminders of the challenges we face and the sacrifices that are needed.
I rise in support of the chairman's hard work on behalf of this bill, and I particularly appreciate the inclusion of the clear understanding that we have to face a direct threat to our national security and we have to do it by joining together and establishing a commonsense set of solutions to the problems now before us.
The Aviation Security Act the chairman has worked so hard on is the result of many years of his labors and understanding of the difficulties we confront. I certainly commend him and thank him for his hard work.
I also rise as a cosponsor of the Carnahan amendment to provide critical assistance to airline workers and those in aviation-related industries who were laid off as a direct result of the terrorist attacks.
At the time we considered the so-called airline bailout bill, many of us made very clear in our statements on the floor that we were disappointed that some concerns for the workers who were going to lose their jobs were not included in the bailout bill. We come today to reinforce our deep concern and to ask our colleagues to support the Carnahan amendment.
The numbers are overwhelming. We know that 100,000 workers have been laid off in the airline industry. At least 30,000 more have been laid off in airline manufacturing. We are concerned that if the American traveling public and visitors from overseas don't resume flying, as I urge everyone to do--I have flown numerous times already, and I encourage everyone to begin again to travel for business and pleasure--
if for whatever reason that return to the air is delayed, then the numbers will undoubtedly grow.
Many of these airline workers are based in New York. They have been supporting our air transportation system out of JFK and LaGuardia. They have been literally handling some of the busiest air traffic corridors in the world. We know that reductions in flight schedules at both of these airports have put thousands of New Yorkers out of work: pilots and flight attendants, baggage and passenger service representatives. This has had a ripple effect throughout New York.
For example, in Syracuse, in upstate New York, a call center for US Airways that had been there for many years was shut down, throwing more than 400 employees out of work.
These airline and aviation-related industry layoffs are not just numbers. They represent the lives and livelihoods of hard-working Americans. I have heard many stories, as my colleagues have, of the hardships that are being imposed because out of the skies on September 11 came these dreadful, horrible acts of terrorism, where people who were willing to commit suicide brought about the deaths of thousands and thousands of our fellow citizens and people from all over the world and also wreaked havoc on our airline industry and the economy in general.
I hope as we consider this Aviation Security Act, for which I support and again thank the chairman and the ranking member, we will also support Senator Carnahan's amendment. Her aid package for dislocated workers is modeled after the successful trade adjustment assistance. It will allow airline workers to extend their unemployment insurance while they receive needed job training and support services or while, hopefully, they wait to be called back to work because we will all start flying again.
This amendment will also enable families to receive health care benefits as they go through this difficult period.
No story more sums up the anguish and pain of the losses we are discussing and the need to improve security than one that comes out of JFK. A TWA flight attendant at that airport received her furlough notice while awaiting news of her husband, a New York City firefighter missing at the World Trade Center. New Yorkers and Americans have paid a very heavy price. We are summoning our resolve. We are preparing our responses individually and throughout our Nation. We are following the leadership of our President. We are supporting our men and women in uniform.
I urge my colleagues to support the act that Chairman Hollings and Senator McCain have crafted and support the Carnahan amendment on which she has worked so hard to pay some attention and provide assistance to those Americans who woke up on September 11 thinking that it was any other workday and went to bed on that terrible day knowing that they might lose their jobs as a result of this horrific attack.
I thank my colleagues and yield back the remainder of my time.
Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, nearly one month has passed since the ferocious attacks of September 11th. Words remain inadequate to describe or define the event. Analysts are beginning to assess the immediate costs in economic terms. Someday, perhaps, historians will succeed in cataloguing, analyzing and calculating the losses. But some losses--families torn apart, communities devastated--will remain forever beyond calculation.
However, the tragic events of September 11th leave no question that our airport security system is in need of reformation. The ability of hijackers to ease through our Nation's airport screeners has created fear among the American public about flying and has led to a significant downturn in the travel and tourism industry. Around the country, air travelers now patiently wait in long lines after emergency security procedures have been instituted to prevent further tragedies. Thousands of employees, not only from the airline industry, but also well beyond it, have lost their jobs. During these difficult times, it is imperative that Congress act to protect Americans from future terrorism and to provide economic assistance to those left unemployed because of the horrendous acts of September 11th. I strongly support S. 1447 because it takes vital steps to strengthen our Nation's airport security system, to ensure safety for crews and passengers, and to bolster our economy.
Among the most important provisions in this bill is the federalization of airport security personnel. I support this plan because it is a clear solution to one of the most troublesome aspects of our current airport security operations: the failure of screeners to detect dangerous objects. The atrocities of the recent terrorist attacks highlight the inadequacies of the current screening system. Under the system, airlines, subject to Federal Aviation Administration requirements, are responsible for administering screening of passengers and their carry-on luggage. Airlines generally contract out their screening responsibility to private security companies, often awarding contracts based upon the lowest bid rather than superior security systems. Allowing airlines such authority has resulted in a system that too often promotes lower costs over the safety of passengers.
Recent separate studies by the GAO and the DOJ's Inspector General revealed the serious inadequacies of the current screening system and causes for its failures. Among the problems noted by the IG report was the frequent failure of the airlines to conduct background checks of employees with access to secure areas and the ability of IG personnel to access secure areas without being challenged by security 68 percent of the time. The GAO report which concluded that screener performance in major U.S. airports was unsatisfactory, attributed the poor performance of security screeners to a high employee turnover rate, more than 100 percent per year at many airports--low wages, insufficient training, and inadequate monitoring of screeners.
Federalizing security operations throughout U.S. airports is the best answer for improving screener performance. It would raise wages, lower employee turnover, promote career loyalty among screeners, create uniform training among security personnel, and, as a result, strengthen the performance of screeners to discover dangerous objects. Once the Federal government ensures that screeners are performing their duties in strict adherence to the highest safety standards, the public will gain greater confidence in airport security. In light of the current campaign against terrorism, now is the time to incorporate this change. As a recent New York Times editorial stated, ``airports are a front line in the struggle against terrorism, and it no longer makes sense to delegate their policing to the private sector, which emphasizes low cost as opposed to security.'' I agree with this assessment.
I also want to underscore my support for Senator Carnahan's amendment to provide much-needed relief for the thousands of hard-working employees in the airline industry who have lost their jobs as a result of the horrific attack on our Nation on September 11th. This amendment will provide unemployment benefits, health care and training to airline industry employees who have been laid off due to the marked decrease in air travel in this country.
The airline industry has been most directly affected in the aftermath of the attack, but the ripple effect of the attacks is being felt throughout other industries as well. Hotel, travel, and tourism employees, who number in the hundreds of thousands, are at risk of losing their jobs due to the nationwide decrease in travel. In Maryland, tourism is a $7.7 billion industry. It means jobs for our people and revenues for our State and local programs. While we are moving vigorously to encourage travelers to come to Maryland this fall, a decrease in tourism is expected in the State, as it is nationwide. While it is crucial that we provide support to airline workers at this time, we should also remember the plight of the hundreds of thousands of other workers across the State of Maryland and the country whose livelihood may be affected.
The terrorist attacks of September 11th were intended to create fear in Americans and our way of life, including air travel. This legislation will help to ease fears about air travel and the state of our economy by strengthening our airport security system. In this regard, I urge the Senate to pass this legislation expeditiously.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Miller). Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
