Fourteen months after the Sept. 11 attacks that staggered the nation, the
Senate in a 90-9 vote granted final approval Tuesday to legislation that
presents a united front against terrorism by creating a massive Department
of Homeland Security.
In a
final flurry of legislative wrangling, the Senate rejected, by 51-47 vote, a
Democratic amendment designed to remove seven provisions from the bill that
were viewed as pro-business favors initiated by Republicans.
Sen. Debbie Stabenow fought for the unsuccessful amendment, but said it was
time to approve a flawed bill and "fight another day."
"I believe it's time to move forward on homeland security, but I really
struggled with this," the Lansing Democrat said. "I wanted to see funding
for our local providers, our police and fire. And there were things thrown
into this bill at the last minute that have nothing to do with homeland
security."
Sen. Carl Levin cast one of the 9 dissenting votes.
"The legislation the Senate will pass tonight has numerous unrelated and
inappropriate special interest provisions, omits numerous related and
appropriate homeland security provisions, and fails to address probably the
most central question to our security -- the coordination and sharing of
information between the CIA and the FBI," Levin said in his remarks on the
floor of the Senate before the vote.
The Cabinet-level agency to be created will be the most monumental
reorganization of the federal government since the formation of the Defense
Department in 1947. The $40 billion Department of Homeland Security will
consolidate 22 agencies and be manned by 170,000 employees.
A year ago, President Bush had initially balked at combining agencies such
as Customs, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the Secret Service
and the Coast Guard into a single homeland security department.
Nonetheless, Tuesday's vote by the lame-duck Senate was a triumph for Bush,
who had expressed frustration for several months at Congress' inaction on
the issue. Speaking to Republican senators from Air Force One on Tuesday as
he flew to NATO meetings in Europe, Bush called the new department "landmark
in its scope" and thanked the lawmakers for securing final passage.
The president and key advisers actively lobbied wavering senators to defeat
the Democratic amendment.
Three Democrats opposed the amendment while one Republican, Sen. John McCain
of Arizona, supported it. Republicans said the amendment was a stalling
tactic that would prevent the House and Senate from agreeing on a final bill
before the end of the year.
"The terrorists are not going to wait for a process that goes on days, weeks
or months," said Senate GOP Leader Trent Lott of Mississippi. "...We need to
get this done and we need to do it now."
The Democratic amendment sparked one final flurry of debate after the Senate
spent five months battling over labor provisions that will strip union
workers in the new department of various workplace protections.
The bill will give Bush authority to hire, fire and deploy workers
regardless of workplace rules.
Other aspects of the bill will: extend by one year the Dec. 31 deadline for
airports to install explosive detection systems and to screen all baggage;
cap the amount of damages that two airport-screening companies on duty Sept.
11 could face from lawsuits; provide a test program to allow pilots to carry
guns in airline cockpits; and weaken an amendment offered by the late Sen.
Paul Wellstone to bar companies that establish offshore tax havens from
receiving federal homeland security contracts.
The most controversial of the seven provisions targeted for removal by
Democrats was a measure that would have made manufactures of vaccines immune
from lawsuits.
What makes the provision unusual is that it would protect drug makers,
particularly Eli Lilly, from pending lawsuits. The parents of about 150
children have have filed suit, claiming that their child's autism was caused
by thimerosal, a mercury preservative once included in child vaccines
designed to prevent measles, mumps and rubella.
By steering those lawsuits into a federal program that limits compensation
in vaccine lawsuits, the alleged victims would be limited to $250,000 in
damages collected.
Critics have called the amendment an "Eli Lilly bailout" and have said it
could save the pharmaceutical industry millions of dollars, if not billions.
Adding to the uproar was the fact that the drug industry gave $14 million in
contributions to congressional candidates in the Nov. 5 election, mostly to
Republicans. Eli Lilly led the way with $1.6 million.
In addition, Sidney Taurel, Lilly's president and chief executive, is a
member of the White House Advisory Council on Homeland Security, and
President Bush's budget director, Mitch Daniels, was formerly president of
the company's North American operations.
Daniels said he played no role in forwarding the amendment, and Eli Lilly
officials say they don't know how the amendment was inserted into the
homeland security bill.
Lott and House Speaker Dennis Hastert have assured moderate Republicans that
the provision will be eliminated by the new Congress that takes office in
January. A skeptical Stabenow said she will introduce legislation to wipe it
off the books.
"This is absolutely outrageous," she said. "This is a political,
special-interest provision that ... raises some serious ethical questions.
This eliminates families' ability to have their day in court."
ALL INFORMATION, DATA, AND
MATERIAL CONTAINED, PRESENTED, OR PROVIDED HERE IS FOR GENERAL INFORMATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS REFLECTING THE KNOWLEDGE OR OPINIONS
OF THE PUBLISHER, AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED OR INTENDED AS PROVIDING MEDICAL OR
LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO VACCINATE IS AN IMPORTANT AND
COMPLEX ISSUE AND SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU, AND YOU ALONE, IN CONSULTATION WITH
YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.
"A foolish faith in authority is the worst enemy of truth."
-- Albert Einstein, letter to a friend, 1901
"I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves, and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education."
-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to William C. Jarvis, September 28, 1820
"What's the point of vaccination if it doesn't protect you from the unvaccinated?"
-- Sandy Gottstein
"Who gets to decide what the greater good is and how many will be sacrificed to it?"
