9/11 Proposals Keep Lights On in Capitol

Congress is holding more than a dozen hearings during a month when the Capitol is ordinarily dark, highlighting a bipartisan determination to shore up the nation’s defenses against terrorism.

But though the spirit is willing, the budget is not. Despite bipartisan cooperation, this year’s record deficit has lawmakers publicly wondering how they can implement all the recommendations of the independent Sept. 11 commission, whose scathing report last month on the inadequacy of the nation’s defenses triggered the current burst of activity.

Sen. Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine) pointed out Monday that so far $500 million had been allocated for seaport security proposals that the government estimated would cost $7 billion. She said during a Senate Commerce Committee hearing that President Bush had sought $46 million in federal security grants to seaports next year, down 69% from two years ago. “That simply is unacceptable,” she said.

Maureen Ellis, a spokeswoman for the American Assn. of Port Authorities, which represents public seaports, said her group was “still finding it a struggle” to get more money for security.

Although there is no estimate on how much all the commission’s recommendations on transportation security would cost, its plan to improve airport security alone is projected to cost $1 billion a year over five years. Bills pending in the Senate would authorize about $1 billion to shore up railroads and $5 billion to tighten security on public transit systems.

“We are mindful that our recommendations will cost money,” Thomas H. Kean, chairman of the Sept. 11 commission, told the Commerce Committee. “But we have seen the devastating cost in human life and in economic destruction that result from successful attack.”

The August activity underscores the political importance attached by Congress to responding quickly to the commission’s recommendations. Several lawmakers pledged to have legislation ready when Congress reconvened after Labor Day to implement many of the commission’s proposals.

“Our enemies are not going to wait, nor can we wait,” Snowe said.

At a hearing before the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, Sen. John D. “Jay” Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.) raised the possibility that Congress might need to hold a lame-duck session to act on the commission’s recommendations.

“If the Congress and the president can’t reach a successful agreement and constructive reform this year -- and I don’t preclude a postelection session -- we certainly will have failed the American people,” he said.

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) said his committee was working on an intelligence reform bill that largely mirrored the Sept. 11 commission’s recommendations.

Roberts said the bill would create a national intelligence director “empowered with the authorities to really lead the intelligence community as proposed in the 9/11 commission’s recommendations.” Roberts did not elaborate, but his comments suggested that the committee planned to endow the new intelligence director with authority over budgets and hiring decisions -- a step the Bush administration has resisted.

Three former CIA directors testified at Monday’s hearing and generally endorsed the idea of creating a more powerful director to oversee the 15 agencies that make up the intelligence community. Conflicts and turf fighting among the disparate agencies have been blamed for contributing to intelligence failures leading up to the Sept. 11 attacks.

Political experts differ about how soon Congress is likely to act.

Donald F. Kettl, a University of Pennsylvania political scientist, said that both Democrats and Republicans were “racing to act -- and to be seen as acting” -- to shore up anti-terrorism defenses.

“Members of Congress fear that, if they don’t act before election day, they’ll appear to be guilty of precisely what the commission criticized them for,” he said.

Additionally, he said, there is heavy pressure from the presidential campaigns, with both candidates trying to gain the upper hand on domestic security. “It’s still an uphill battle, but the odds for passage of a significant part of the commission’s recommendations now are likely,” Kettl said.

Thomas Mann, an expert on Congress at the Brookings Institution, said the unusual activity on Capitol Hill during the summer recess “reflects the success of the 9/11 commission in forcing intelligence reform onto the agenda.”

“But we are a long way from seeing enactment of any of their ideas,” he said. “At this stage, it is mostly about gaining political cover. I don’t expect Congress to act quickly on these measures.”

Reform recommendations were treated with skepticism before the Senate Armed Services Committee, with former Defense secretaries urging caution over transferring power from the Pentagon to a national intelligence director.

Frank Carlucci, secretary during the Reagan administration, advised against creating an intelligence director, arguing instead that the CIA director be given greater power.

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld is scheduled to testify today, as is acting CIA Director John E. McLaughlin.

Battles also are likely over how much should be spent to further protect transportation systems from terrorism and who should pay.

For example, in the case of port security, should it be taxpayers or shippers?