Mr. SHAYS. At this time I would with great respect recognize Mr. Kucinich, the ranking member of this subcommittee. Mr. KUCINICH. I thank the Chair for calling this hearing, and thank the witnesses for being here and for their service to our country. I think it's important to begin a hearing like this by stating the obvious. When we make a reference to our troops serving to protect this country, and we have the 9/11 Commission leaders in front of us, I think it's important to state for the record that Iraq had nothing to do with September 11th. That was not necessarily the charge of the Commission to come to that conclusion. But I think that as we start to extrapolate on matters of security and matters of civil liberties, we need to go right back to first things first. Iraq had nothing to do with September 11th, and our presence in Iraq right now is, in and of itself, violating international law, and any security problems we have in this country that are tied to Iraq have to be fought squarely on the backs of the administration. So I want to thank the chairman for holding this hearing. I can think of no more important issue than ensuring constitutional rights and fundamental freedoms of all the citizens of our country. Mr. Chairman, Congress surely had protection of civil liberties in mind when it passed the 2004 Intelligence Reform Act, creating the Privacy and Civil Liberties Board and the position of Civil Liberties Protection Officer, yet it seems that this administration Mr. SHAYS. I would like to point out to the gentleman that the mic was not on. Could all of you hear the first part of what he said? Mr. KUCINICH. No. I'll repeat it. I would hate for anyone not to have heard what I said. Mr. SHAYS. I just want to apologize to him. We have a button here that was not on. Was it on when I spoke? Mr. KUCINICH. Was it on when the chairman spoke? Mr. SHAYS. Anyway Mr. KUCINICH. See, Mr. Chairman, coming from Cleveland, when I was mayor, the council used to shut my mic off, so I just kept speaking. So I didn't know the mic wasn't on, but I would happily ask the Chair if he wanted me to make some remarks that could go on the record. Mr. SHAYS. No. We're on the record. Mr. KUCINICH. OK. Once again, Iraq had nothing to do with September 11th. And if we're going to start talking about security and then from there talk about the protection of civil liberties in that context, I think it's important that we establish a ground of meaning. And since the 9/11 Report focused mostly on the domestic matters, and since we have the two distinguished gentlemen in front of us, I think it's important to remember that we're in Iraq based on lies. And it's quite possible that what issues come from that is going to continue to be a lie. The Bible says, "this which is crooked cannot be made straight." We may be in such a condition with respect to Iraq and all the policies that flow from it. Nevertheless, Mr. Chairman, Congress surely had the protection of civil liberties in mind when it passed the 2004 Intelligence Reform Act, creating the Privacy and Civil Liberties Board and the position of Civil Liberties Protection Officer. Yet it seems that this administration doesn't feel the same way. To the White House, the civil liberties of Americans just aren't a very high priority. They're viewed as an inconvenience. When the Bush administration increasingly snoops into the lives of Americans, from monitoring library records to eavesdropping on our phone calls to collecting data on our travel records, with virtual immunity, this administration shows it pays lip service to the protection of our privacy and civil liberties. Why else has there been delay after delay in establishing the Privacy and Civil Liberties Board? Why did they wait more than 15 months to appoint the five members of the Board? Why has the Board had to struggle with issues of budget, staff support, office space? According to the ACLU, the Board, "only gives the illusion of oversight without doing anything real.” I believe this administration does not want this Board to succeed, and in dragging its feet, it tells us that it will only follow the letter of the law, not the spir it. The Board has no authority to carry out its mission. It is still, according to the Los Angeles Times, a "paper tiger." the Board has no subpoena power, and any requests by the Board for Federal documents can be vetoed by the Attorney General of the United States. The Board does not have to hold public hearings or issue any public material aside from the annual report to Congress. Tellingly, Americans only learned of the Board's initial meetings this year through a press release issued after the meetings took place. Clearly the Board as it currently operates cannot be viewed as either independent or effective. Mr. Chairman, I hope this Board can get its act together and fulfill the responsibilities that the 9/11 Commission and Congress envisioned for it. We should not act hypocritically or compromise when it comes to our Nation's founding principles. These are the very freedoms and democratic values we espouse to other democratic nations to embrace, and which allegedly we're sending our young men and women in the military all over the world to protect. Mr. Chairman, I think it would be great if we could work together to send a request to the White House. I would like to see this subcommittee get all transcripts and meeting notes from the White House Privacy and Civil Liberties Board and would ask that we subpoena those if necessary. It's vital that Congress performs its oversight duties over such an important body and ensures that the Board acts in the best interest of every American, not just those of the White House. I want to thank Governor Kean, I want to thank Congressman Hamilton for their leadership during the September 11th investigation process and through their efforts in the 9/11 Discourse Project to enact reform suggested by the Commission. I want to welcome the members of the September 11th families who are here today and applaud their efforts to ensure that civil liberties are protected. On one final note, when we speak of setting up a civil liberties board, you would think that ought to be actually the business of the U.S. Congress, and it should be the business of the courts. When you come forward and set up a structure after the fact that somehow's supposed to monitor to make sure that our constitutional rights are protected, and any administration frustrates the actions of that commission, go back and ask the first question: Why is this administration not taking the Constitution of the United States into account when it designs security for this country? Why has it determined that it would throw out the window so many constitutional protections? No board, the purpose of which we're here today to talk about, is going to be able to effectively answer that question. Mr. SHAYS. Thank the gentleman. [The prepared statement of Hon. Dennis J. Kucinich follows:] Statement of Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich House Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Committee on Government Reform Hearing on "9/11 Commission Recommendations: June 6, 2006 Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for holding this hearing. I can think of no more important issue than ensuring that the constitutional rights and fundamental freedoms of all American citizens are safeguarded. Mr. Chairman, Congress surely had the protection of civil liberties in mind when it passed the 2004 Intelligence Reform Act, creating the Privacy and Civil Liberties Board and the position of Civil Liberties Protection Officer. Yet, it seems that this Administration doesn't feel the same way - to the White House, the civil liberties of Americans just aren't a very high priority. Rather, they are viewed as an inconvenience. While the Bush Administration increasingly snoops into the daily lives of Americans, from monitoring library records to eavesdropping on our phone calls to collecting data on our travel records with virtual impunity, this Administration has shown that it only pays lip service to the protection of our privacy and civil liberties. Why else has there been delay after delay after delay in establishing the Privacy and Civil Liberties Board? Why did the White House wait more than 15 months to appoint the five members of the Board? Why did the White House not give the Board any budget, any support staff, or even office space? According to the ACLU, the Board "only gives the illusion of oversight without doing anything real." I believe this Administration wants the Board to fail, and in dragging its feet, tells us that it only will follow the letter of the law, not the spirit. 'American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU: Bipartisan Civil Liberties Board Fix Bill Long Overdue, Measure Would Take Oversight Panel Out of the "Hip Pocket of the President (Mar. 15, 2005). |