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.
“MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND VETERANS AFFAIRS AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2016” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security was published in the in the Extensions of Remarks section section on page E1835 on Dec. 18, 2015.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND VETERANS AFFAIRS AND RELATED AGENCIES
APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2016
______
speech of
HON. BOB GOODLATTE
of virginia
in the house of representatives
Thursday, December 17, 2015
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, the cybersecurity measures in the legislation before us today results from a bill passed unanimously by the House Homeland Security Committee and the House Select Committee on Intelligence, who both worked closely with the Judiciary Committee to craft the liability provisions included in the House-passed bill, and in the bill before us today. I rise to discuss its liability provisions in particular.
It is increasingly clear that government at all levels must rely on the private sector to help counter more and varied threats to its citizens by those who would do them harm. Those threats can come in the form of terrorist mass shootings, suicide bombers, and cyber-attacks that steal people's personal identification, money, and credit. At the same time, abusive lawsuits have made the private sector less and less willing to take action to reduce public risks because of the fear of frivolous lawsuits.
To date, Congress has enacted two federal statutes, the SAFETY Act and the PREP Act, to provide private entities that are on the front lines in the war with terrorists with protection from debilitating litigation that would otherwise deter them from acting at all. The legislation before us today is a logical extension of those vital efforts.
Soon after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the federal government appealed directly to the private sector for help in combating terrorism. Shortly thereafter, a team of the nation's leading scientists called for a comprehensive rethinking of our anti-terrorism infrastructure, underscoring the need to encourage private activity so existing technologies could be quickly brought into use. According to their report, conducted under the auspices of the National Academies,
``Research performed but not exploited, and technologies invented but not manufactured and deployed, do not help the nation protect itself.''
As part of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, Congress enacted liability protections that the Department of Homeland Security could extend to providers of effective anti-terrorism technologies. The SAFETY Act has resulted in the deployment of tens of thousands of anti-
terrorism technologies to protect innocent Americans that would not have been deployed absent the Act's lawsuit protections.
The SAFETY Act was initially opposed by the trial lawyers and their allies. But it soon came to enjoy broad bipartisan support. So much so that in January, 2007, just after the Democrats took control the House, a bill directing the Secretary of Homeland Security to streamline the SAFETY Act and anti-terrorism technology procurement processes passed by a vote of 427 to zero. During the debate on that legislation, the Democratic Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, Bennie Thompson, said during debate on the bill: ``Today I rise to support a bill that reaffirms our commitment to ensuring that safe and effective antiterrorism technologies are being deployed . . . In order to generate revolutionary breakthroughs in antiterrorism technologies, the Department must actively promote awareness of SAFETY Act protections not only among private sector, but across government procurement agencies . . . We must enable the private sector to deliver the revolutionary, breakthrough technologies that will help win the Nation's fight against terrorism.''
In 2005, Congress enacted the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act, the ``PREP Act.'' Under the PREP Act, covered entities are protected from lawsuits when they engage in federally approved efforts to create vaccines and other means of stopping the spread of pandemics and other biological threats, including biological attacks by terrorists. Again, the PREP Act was initially opposed by the trial lawyers and their allies. But after it became law, President Obama, along with his predecessor, applied the PREP Act's protections many times, including to cover those making and administering influenza vaccines. Just last December, President Obama's Secretary of Health and Human Services applied the PREP Act's lawsuit protections to those manufacturing and distributing vaccines to help prevent the spread of the Ebola virus. In a press release announcing the application of the liability protections to those companies, the Secretary of Health and Human Services stated, and I quote, ``The PREP Act was designed to facilitate the development of medical countermeasures to respond to urgent public health needs, including the development of critical vaccines like those to prevent the spread of Ebola . . . My strong hope
. . . is that other nations will also enact appropriate liability protection . . .'' Indeed, one of the vaccines the President protected from excessive liability under the PREP Act was able to quickly advance through its testing phases such that, by this August, it was declared
``highly effective.''
Today, I am proud to continue the bipartisan tradition of protecting the private sector from lawsuits when it's necessary to help the federal government do its job in protecting our nation's citizens from attack.
____________________
