Kerry on the Patriot Act and other subjects

[Mass]

From the Congressional record: Friday, December 16th.

Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, today I voted against cloture on the PATRIOT Act reauthorization conference report. I want to make clear that this vote was not about whether I support reauthorizing the PATRIOT Act--I do. This vote was about whether I thought that the significant and unnecessary invasions into the privacy rights of all Americans were necessary to protect our national security--I do not.

Last July, the Senate passed by unanimous consent a PATRIOT Act reauthorization bill. I supported that bipartisan, compromise bill. Even though it did not contain all the privacy protections I would have liked, it took a lot of steps towards improving the problems in the PATRIOT Act that have become evidence since its passage. If that bill was on the floor today, I would support it.

But it is not. What we do have on the floor is a conference report that fails to address some of the most serious problems with the PATRIOT Act. For example, its version of Section 215 allows the Government to obtain library, medical, gun records, and other sensitive personal information on a mere showing that those records are relevant to an authorized intelligence investigation. That is it. Relevance is all that is required. The Senate bill, on the other hand would have established a three part test to determine whether the records have some connection to a suspected terrorist or spy. This seemingly small change will help prevent investigations which invade the privacy of American citizens that may have no connection to any suspected terrorist or spy. This is an important restriction.

In addition, unlike the Senate bill the conference report provides no mechanism for the recipient of a Section 215 order to challenge the accompanying automatic, permanent gag order. The FISA, Foreign Intelliegence Surveillance Act, court reviews are simply not sufficient. They have the power only to review the Government application for the underlying Section 215 order. They do not have the power to make an individualized determination about whether a gag order should accompany it. So the recipient of a Section 215 order is automatically silenced forever. How is that fair? How is that consistent with our democratic principles?

The conference report doesn't provide judicial review of National Security Letters either. The Senate bill did. Judicial review is one of our best checks on unnecessary Government intrusion into individual privacy. Why deny it to our citizens?

Lastly, I would like to mention the problem with the conference reports provisions on the so-called sneak-and-peek search warrants. Unlike the Senate bill, the conference report does not include any protections against these warrants. Rather than requiring that the government notify the target of these warrants within 7 days, as the Senate bill did, the conference report requires notification within 30 days of the search. Thirty days. That is an awfully long time to go before learning that you have been the subject of a Government search.

These are just a few of the problems with the conference report. They are
the most significant problems. Those in support know that it is flawed, but they are creating artificial time pressure to force us to approve the bill, flawed as it may be.

I realize that 16 provisions of the PATRIOT Act are set to expire. I certainly do not want that to happen. But passing this conference report is not the only way to prevent their expiration. That is why I have cosponsored legislation to extend those provisions by three months to allow us time to fix the problems with the conference report. If that effort fails and the PATRIOT Act expires, the blame rests only with the White House and leadership that controls the House and the Senate. There was and remains a simple, unified way to get this done, and they rejected it.

There is no reason why we cannot be safe and free. The Senate bill accomplished this. And, I will keep working with my colleagues in the Senate to ensure that whatever legislation we ultimately pass to reauthorize the PATRIOT Act also accomplishes this.

[Mass]

1. And about Corzine

From the Congressional record: Friday, December 16th.

Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, knowing JON CORZINE as I think I do, if he had known he was going to have to sit through all these speeches after he spoke, he would have come down here a lot later at night, I suspect, or certainly waited until we got out of town, because that is the nature of this Senator, Governor to be.

I have listened to my colleagues and I listened to his speech. He left us with some important warnings, some important pleas, which I hope colleagues will take seriously. I would incorporate into my comments about JON all of the things Senator Sarbanes said. They were a wonderful summary of what he did and how he did it, his accomplishments.

He did veterans, and he has been a passionate advocate for public transportation. He was instrumental in housing. These are the sorts of signal accomplishments you can measure, which he can point to and colleagues have, that define the few years he has been here.

I say a word or two about the things that helped push him in the direction of accomplishing those goals. What has always struck me about JON CORZINE and the thing that has been singled out in a number of comments made by my colleagues is the quality of the person, almost an improbable quality when you measure it against the profession he chose for so many years.

Maybe a comment about Wall Street, certainly a comment that I know JON CORZINE would articulate any number of different times in different ways, that we don't think of people traditionally, with the obvious exceptions, a Bob Rubin, some others. JON CORZINE always kept, No. 1, a great sense of idealism; No. 2, a very strong moral compass that led him to always distinguish between right and wrong; and, No. 3, an integrity about the approach to public life that willingly disclosed great wealth, willingly submitted himself to unbelievable attacks in order to pursue a greater good. Most people would shy away from that today. When you talk to people in the private sector today about running for office, they are quick to say: Do that? Why would I want to do that? Why would I want to subject myself to that? Why would I want to put myself through that scrutiny?

JON CORZINE has always been driven by his sense that there is too much missing in governance today, that there is a bigger purpose than all of us individually, a noble purpose in what we are trying to achieve. He believes unabashedly that Government can be part of the solution, that Government actually helps people. And unlike so much of the rhetoric of the last years that has attacked everything Government does until you have a Katrina, when you understand why you need it, or until you see the potholes in the streets and the bridges falling apart and you begrudgingly acknowledge you need it, JON always believes you need it proactively. He understands the good it can do.

Every one of us who has had the privilege of being here for awhile was impressed by that passion and moral compass he brought to some of the issues. When business people in America were abusing their trust, JON brought this extraordinary credibility to that debate. There are huge provisions, as Senator Sarbanes will tell us, and a great deal of guidance through that process that came from this freshman Senator.

Likewise, with respect to Darfur, an issue where the country ought to be providing a sense of moral outrage, JON doggedly and tenaciously pursued that issue without grandstanding, without trying to do it in a way that was sort of hit and run. He stayed at it and got the Senate ultimately to take some measures, though never what we ought to be doing, and the country has yet to do what he knows and understands we ought to be doing.

He always has had a sense of right and wrong. The minimum wage, the incomprehensibility of us being a country where people can live out work values and you can't live, and his sense of injustice at giving a tax cut to people such as him who have been blessed with the fruits of great wealth, who understand that there is a different set of priorities, a sense of outrage that we would be cutting children off of Medicaid, and so on down the list.

I am thrilled, and I know when I was privileged to be in New Jersey, I could feel it in the people of New Jersey who obviously were inundated with an onslaught of confusing and reprehensible kinds of claims in the context of a campaign, which we have seen too much of, but he plowed through that, because of that idealism and his sense of purpose for the State. Those folks are anticipating the same kind of excitement that he said in his comments he will bring to this new challenge.

The people of New Jersey have chosen wisely. They are going to have a leader who will do exactly what Senator Sarbanes talked about. He has the opportunity to make that State one of the great laboratories in the country, to do what we are unsuccessful and unwilling to do too often at this moment in our history here in Washington. I almost envy him that opportunity to grab the executive reins and go out and do it. He is going to be an exceptional Governor. He is going to continue to have an impact on what Congress chooses to do because of those priorities that he sets in the State.

There is no question in my mind that our caucus, which has looked to him regularly as sort of the resident expert on issues of fiscal, trade, Wall Street matters, is going to miss that expertise enormously.

I thank this Senator for his service to us, to the country, and we look forward to the service he will provide as Governor of New Jersey.

[MH1]

4. Thanks for this.

I love what he is saying about Corzine, and it is no wonder they get along well. I think they share a lot in that part about idealism, moral compass, and integrity about public office; and the strength to submit oneself to the scrutiny and attacks that come with running for office.

Soounds like there's a bit of "kindred soul" stuff happening there.

I am so glad Corzine won, but kind of sad to see him leave the Senate, where he must have been a good ally for Kerry.

On edit - thanks for all the others too! This one just strikes me as extra special, since I'm near NJ, and used to live there, too.

[Mass]

2. On Katrina

From the Congressional record: Thursday, December 15th.

SBA RESPONSE TO HURRICANES IN GULF STATES -- (Senate - December 15, 2005)



---

Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, obviously somewhere in the next few days--we don't know when yet--we are going to be wrapping up our business here, and that will mark the end of the first session of the 109th Congress. Before we leave, Members on both sides of the aisle are very concerned that we will not have provided the assistance to the small businesses in the Gulf States region that they desperately need in order to recover from the effects of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

The effect is that literally hundreds of thousands of small businesses are in desperate need of assistance throughout that region. Without the jobs those small businesses provide, the economy of the gulf coast is going to have a much harder time coming back.

Since Hurricanes Katrina and Rita hit the gulf coast, regrettably--this has been commented on again by Senators on both sides of the aisle; it is not a partisan issue--there has been a stunningly slow response by the Administration to provide relief to small businesses.

The administration has now sent up three pieces of emergency legislation--three supplemental emergency spending bills worth more than $62 billion--and yet we have not adopted any direct relief for small businesses.

The latest supplemental request asks for $471 million in additional funding for SBA disaster loans and the SBA Inspector General. But, frankly, giving more money to the disaster loan program doesn't address small business needs. It's too narrow in scope and is not delivering relief with urgency.

Senator Lott has talked about the problems--Senator Cochran has too--and there is a recognition that you have a lot of small businesses that can't wait till their disaster loans are processed or disbursed. They need access to capital immediately.

It is a matter of record now, commented on in many national journals, that the SBA has done a completely inadequate job--abysmal may be a better word--of getting disaster loan funds into the hands of small businesses in the gulf region.

It is not because of the lack of funds or the lack of employees. The SBA has enough funding to grant $1.4 billion in disaster loans, and $249 million for administration and staff. The staffing has been increased from some 800 employees to 4,000 employees.

As of Monday of this week, almost 39,000 small businesses had applied for



SBA disaster loans. Yet with all of these resources, both personnel and money, only 9,200 loans have been actually processed, which is 25 percent, and only 2,600, which is 7 percent, had actually been approved. Only 240 had actually seen a disbursement of money.

In addition, as of last week, the SBA had handed out only 10 of its new gulf opportunity loans the administration's answer to the business community's call for bridge loans.

We were assured by the SBA Administrator several weeks ago in a bipartisan committee hearing that those loans were on track, that they would respond rapidly, that they had enough people in place, that they were going to get the money out, and, indeed, here we are with the same record that was the incentive to have that hearing in the first place.

These loans, I might add, have an interest rate of as much as 13.5 percent. Why would we be providing a 13.5 percent loan to people who have been hit when you are trying to do it as a matter of disaster response? Frankly, that is beyond me.

The program has generated irate complaints from the very people whom it has been set up to try to help. One small business owner who called my office referred to the SBA and FEMA as ``blackwater mercenaries.'' They feel set upon, not helped. We are not going to help the small businesses down there until we pass comprehensive small business assistance.

Senators LOTT and COCHRAN have stated that the pace of reconstruction in their home State of Mississippi and the other Gulf States is ``unacceptable.''

Despite the assertion of the administration that the Nation's ``small business sector is vibrant,'' Senator Lott has said that the slow pace of approving disaster loans ``is preventing small businesses from coming back and jobs from returning or being created. Not unexpectedly, the unemployment rates in the two largest coastal counties, Harrison and Jackson, are more than quadruple the national average.''

Senator Lott is absolutely correct, and we need to do something about it.

So far, the best efforts of the Senate have been stymied. One bill passed 96-0 in the Senate during consideration of CJS. That was dropped in conference. Another bipartisan bill, S. 1807, the Small Business Hurricane Relief and Reconstruction Act, has been blocked by the White House since September 30. That is almost 2 1/2 months.

Small business owners such as Dr. Edward Lang and Dr. Angela Lang, who rushed to complete their disaster loan application in the weeks following the hurricane, believing that assistance was going to be there, have been told that everything was going to be done to help people recover. They have gone months now without hearing any response from the SBA whatsoever.

In the immediate aftermath of the storm, their small but successful podiatry office based out of New Orleans was deluged with 5 feet of water.

With their savings all but gone, and the ever-shrinking list of patients, all of whom have been displaced by the storm, the Langs are in dire need of assistance. They want to stay there. They want to rebuild their business there. It is essential to New Orleans that people who make that choice are empowered to be able to do so.

Despite repeated offers from out-of-state hospitals, they are sticking by their plan to try to rebuild in the city they love and the place they want to work. But the cold shoulder they received from the SBA is a virtual death sentence for their livelihood. They are just one example of countless other gulf coast businesses that have been ignored by the very governmental agencies that exist to serve them. On its face, that is unacceptable.

The request that has been put forward by the Small Business Committee for $720 million is a little more than 1 percent of the $62 billion the administration has requested for Katrina relief. This legislation is a very small cost compared to the total amount of money the Government is putting in, but an enormous return for the small businesses that need it.

Once again, we are seeing a situation where big business is able to walk away with most of the funding while the vast majority of the job base is in small business, and they are not getting the assistance they need.

What our bill does is to authorize $450 million for the impacted States to provide immediate assistance to small businesses struggling to get on their feet. It authorizes additional funding for SBA's partners--such as the small business development centers that are out in the field trying to provide business counseling to the many people and to the owners who are trying to determine what comes next.

There are too many businesses on the verge of bankruptcy in the hurricanes' wake. Since the goal shared in a bipartisan way by all of the Senate and the House is to try to get those businesses to be leveraged as best as possible, to be able to return as soon as possible, and each small business that returns helps the other small businesses to be able to return, all of those things will make a difference. Tax breaks will help. But the fact is, tax breaks are not enough because tax breaks do not make an impact until you file your taxes. They have nothing to do with the assistance one needs now to be able to have cash in the pocket, to be able to survive the gap. Small businesses need that additional relief, access to capital, immediate and longer-term.

Our bill also addresses the Administration's failure to contract with small businesses to rebuild the region. The New York Times reported more than 80 percent of FEMA contracts alone were awarded on the no-bid limited competition basis. This bill we have introduced--Senator Snowe, myself, and other members of the committee--encourages greater competition by implementing a 30-percent goal for prime contracts and a 40-percent subcontracting goal. With billions of dollars being allocated to relief and reconstruction, it is important to demand fair competition. We need to ensure that America's small businesses are not left behind.

The citizens of the gulf region are courageously and desperately trying to rebuild their communities. The empty promises of several weeks ago, ``we will do what it takes, we will stay as long as it takes,'' are ringing in their ears. Frankly, they are wondering where the actions are to back that up.

According to Mike Allen of Time magazine, one Presidential adviser is quoted as saying recently:

Katrina has fallen so far off the radar screen you can't even find it.

We need to find it. We need to put small businesses back on the radar screen. We need to follow through on the commitments to the victims of these devastating hurricanes. We need to ensure that we do not leave the citizens of the Gulf States behind.

There is bipartisan support to do this. The Senate passed this legislation previously. My hope is before we decide to go home, we will do what is necessary for the citizens who have been so badly impacted in the Gulf State region get the relief they have told us they need.

I yield back the remainder of my time.

[ProSense]

3. Mass, thanks for posting these.

The Patriot Act details are very interesting.

[kerrygoddess]

5. Do you have links? N/T

[Mass]

6. No, the URLs in the Congressional reports are temporary

and I dont know how to make them permanent.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/B?r109:@FIELD(FLD003+s)+@FIELD(DDATE+20051215) (line 14) for Katrina.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/B?r109:@FIELD(FLD003+s)+@FIELD(DDATE+20051216) (line 21) for the other ones.

(copy the URLs in the browser as the link does not work)