Jerry Nadler: Homeland Security Should Be More Than a Slogan

It was another day of business as usual in the House today, as the GOP killed another common sense homeland security reform. This time, they refused to adopt an amendment that would have required every U.S.-bound shipping container to be scanned for radiological weapons at its port of origin. For the party that's running on (and clinging to) security issues as its heart and soul, the Republicans have shown a surprising unwillingness to make security more than a slogan. Today the House passed the SAFE Port Act, a bill to enhance certain facets of port security.

It's fairly noncontroversial in what it does: setting up grant programs for port security, and instituting a system for taking second looks at so-called high-risk shipping containers. It's what the bill does not do, however, that worries Democrats: it does not call for 100-percent scanning of containers. Security experts concur that the only way we're going to stop a nuclear weapon from being smuggled in through our ports - something we know al Qaeda and others would like very much to do - is to scan every shipping container before it sails for our shores, and to have U.S. government officials review the scans so that anything suspicious can be intercepted while it's still a safe distance out.


Congressman Ed Markey and I offered an amendment today to make that policy our law. The amendment was based on a bill I introduced earlier this year, the Sail Only if Scanned (S.O.S) Act. The legislation requires that all containers be scanned for radiation and density at the port of origin, and that all containers to bear tamperproof seals that would notify authorities of any disturbance in real time. As ambitious as it sounds, the bill is grounded in technology and techniques that are already in use. Most notably, the system is being employed at two terminals in Hong Kong, one of the busiest ports in the world.

My bill would essentially take the Hong Kong program and mandate its application to all ports that ship to the United States. It's tough, it's simple, and it makes sense. Congressional Democrats have made it a cornerstone of our Real Security Agenda. The amendment defeated today represents a slightly modified version of the bill, allowing major ports three years to comply with the regulations, and allowing five years for smaller ports to do so. By any standard, this is a common-sense piece of legislation, and one that is sorely needed. So why was it defeated?

More
http://www.tpmcafe.com/node/29531