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.
“INTELLIGENCE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Energy was published in the Extensions of Remarks section on pages E922 on June 18, 2015.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
INTELLIGENCE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016
______
speech of
HON. SHEILA JACKSON LEE
of texas
in the house of representatives
Tuesday, June 16, 2015
The House in Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 2596) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2016 for intelligence and intelligence-related activities of the United States Government, the Community Management Account, and the Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability System, and for other purposes:
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, as a senior member of the Homeland Security Committee and Ranking member of the Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations, I rise in opposition to H.R. 2596, the ``Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016,'' for several reasons.
I opposed the rule because Section 2 of the rule permits the House leadership to continue to be postponed through the legislative day of Thursday, July 30, 2015, further consideration of the motion to reconsider the vote by the House rejecting the Senate amendment to H.R. 1314, the ``Trade Adjustment Act of 2015.''
I do not believe it is appropriate to commingle in one rule subjects as complex, critical, and disparate as international trade policy, on the one hand, and authorization of Intelligence community programs and activities, on the other.
They should be considered separately, debated separately, and voted on separately.
Second, I also opposed the rule because the appropriations authorized by H.R. 2596 are predicated on a continuation of the draconian funding levels set by sequestration rather than more realistic and responsible limits to be negotiated and agreed to by the House and Senate.
I agree with President Obama that prior to consideration of appropriations or annual authorization bills, the House and Senate should first reach agreement on a fair and balanced budget framework that does not harm our economy or require draconian cuts to middle-
class priorities.
When applied to national security information gathering, sequestration is harmful because it adversely affects the ability of the intelligence community to: provide strategic warning to decision-
makers across all levels of government; improve collection technologies to exploit existing and future opportunities and increase resilience; provide cutting-edge technical analysis of counterintelligence, cyber, advanced weapons, and proliferation threats; to spur IC integration; and increase intelligence capacity by investing in critical information technologies.
Third, I oppose the bill because it uses funds intended for Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) in a manner that is inappropriate.
By ignoring the pre-negotiated terms regarding war spending, H.R. 2596 seeks to take monies budgeted for war and defense and apply them to domestic defense while neglecting other vital non-defense priorities of the American people.
Specifically, the bill uses OCO funding to circumvent budget caps in defense and intelligence spending and ignores the long-term connection between national security and economic security and fails to account for vital national security functions carried out at non-defense agencies.
Finally Mr. Chair, I oppose H.R. 2596 on the merits because it contains a highly objectionable ban on the use of funds to transfer any Guantanamo detainee into the United States or construct or modify facilities in the United States to house detainees transferred from Guantanamo.
Also highly objectionable is the provision in the bill providing that nothing in the statute authorizing the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board should be construed to allow that Board to gain access to information the executive branch deems to be related to covert action.
Mr. Chair, in this digital information age the federal government has at its disposal a wealth of resources that enable it to record, track, and monitor the daily activities of ordinary law abiding citizens.
The balance between liberty and security must be respected to preserve our way of life and the values that countless generations have fought to preserve.
This includes taking precautionary measures to ensure that their lives are safe from eminent danger and terrorist threats both domestically and abroad.
I have long supported effective legislation that seeks to do this such as the bipartisan USA FREEDOM Act, which imposes necessary limits on the bulk collection of telecommunication metadata on U.S. citizens by American intelligence agencies, including the National Security Agency.
Because I have long advocated greater diversity and inclusion in government contracting and procurement, I am pleased that H.R. 2596 includes section 334, which requires the Director of National Intelligence to submit a report to Congress regarding participation in contracting opportunities by women, minorities, veterans, and small businesses awarded by elements of the intelligence community for goods, equipment, tools, and services.
There are several other provisions in the bill that I support, including provisions: allowing the Department of Energy's national laboratories to compete for homeland security grants; ensuring better understanding of FBI resource allocation against domestic and foreign threats, and the role of the FBI and DNI in countering violent extremism, particularly among young people; promoting greater oversight of the Intelligence Community's relationships with certain foreign partners; and giving intelligence support to the Ukraine.
But, on balance, Mr. Chair, H.R. 2596 contains more objectionable than salutary provisions, and for that reason I cannot support the bill or the rule governing the terms of floor debate.
____________________
