Hillary Clinton on Homeland Security Secretary of State; previously Democratic Senator (NY); 2016 Democratic nominee

Sub-sections under Homeland Security:
• Benghazi
• Terrorism
• Voting Record
• Other issues under Homeland Security

January 6 insurrection at our capitol was a terrorist attack

Clinton was referring to a raft of state legislation promoted by Republicans aimed at restricting access to the ballot. "What is really, most concerning is that he continues to be destructive," she said. "The January 6 insurrection at our capitol was a terrorist attack," Clinton added, noting the parallel with the 9/11 attacks. "We are now much more worried about internal threats, and there are some who say you can't equate them, having planes flown into the World Trade Center and the terrible loss of life."

"That's a horrific external attack, but now we are engaged in a very serious unfortunate but real battle for our democracy against forces, either led by or inspired by Donald Trump."

Move V.A. into 21st century, but not by privatizing

Q [to Clinton]: Last October you said that surveys of veterans show that they're overall satisfied with their treatment and that the problems with the V.A. aren't as widespread as they're made out to be.

CLINTON: Look, I was outraged by the stories that came out about the V.A. And I have been very clear about the necessity for doing whatever is required to move the V.A. into the 21st century, to provide the kind of treatment options that our veterans today desperately need and deserve. And that's what I will do as president. But I will not let the V.A. be privatized. And I do think there is an agenda out there, supported by my opponent, to do just that. I think that would be very disastrous for our military veterans.

Support our NATO allies and take vetted Syrian refugees

CLINTON: This is a humanitarian catastrophe. The US has to support our allies in Europe. We have to provide financial support. We have to provide the NATO support to back up the mission that is going on. And we have to take properly vetted refugees ourselves.

Haters should realize that American Muslims can help us

Fight the idea of privatizing the V.A.

CLINTON: First of all, I'm absolutely against privatizing the V.A. I am going do everything I can to build on the reforms that Senator Sanders and others in Congress have passed to try to fix what's wrong with the V.A. There are a lot of issues about wait times & services that have to be fixed because our veterans deserve nothing but the best. Yes, let's fix the V.A., but we will never let it be privatized, and that is a promise.

SANDERS: Republicans give a lot of speeches about how much they love veterans. But when it came to put money on the line [in my comprehensive veterans bill], to protect our veterans, frankly, they were not there. Secretary Clinton is absolutely right, there are people, a group called Concerned Veterans of America, funded by the Koch brothers, yes, there are people out there who want to privatize it.

Promise to never privatize V.A.

CLINTON: I'm absolutely against privatizing the V.A. And I am going do everything I can to build on the reforms that Senator Sanders and others in Congress have passed to try to fix what's wrong with the V.A. There are a lot of issues about wait times and services that have to be fixed because our veterans deserve nothing but the best. Yes, let's fix the V.A., but we will never let it be privatized, and that is a promise.

SANDERS: Republicans give a lot of speeches about how much they love veterans. But when it came to put money on the line [in my comprehensive veterans bill], to protect our veterans, frankly, they were not there. Secretary Clinton is absolutely right, there are people, Koch brothers among others, who have a group called Concerned Veterans of America, who want to privatize.

Keep Syrian refugees; we're a nation of resolve, not of fear

CLINTON: Well, I agree that we have to have the toughest screening and vetting.

Q: But a halt?

CLINTON: I don't think a halt is necessary. Now, [screening and vetting] takes 18 to 24 months. So everything that can be done should be done. But the process should move forward while we are also taking on ISIS. I do believe that we have a history and a tradition, that is part of our values system and we don't want to sacrifice our values. We don't want to make it seem as though we are turning into a nation of fear instead of a nation of resolve. I would prioritize widows, and orphans, and the elderly, people who may have relatives, families, or have nowhere else to go. I would prioritize them.

Reach out to Muslims, like George W. Bush did

PATRIOT Act was needed, but Bush chipped away at warrants

CHAFEE: No, no. As long as you're getting a warrant, I believe that under the Fourth Amendment, you should be able to do surveillance. In the PATRIOT Act, section 215 started to get broadened too far, so I would be in favor of addressing and reforming section 215 of the Patriot Act.

Q: Secretary Clinton, do you regret your vote on the Patriot Act?

CLINTON: No, I don't. I think that it was necessary to make sure that we were able after 9/11 to put in place the security that we needed. And it is true that it did require that there be a process. What happened, however, is that the Bush administration began to chip away at that process. And I began to speak out about their use of warrantless surveillance and the other behavior that they engaged in. We always have to keep the balance of civil liberties, privacy and security. It's not easy in a democracy, but we have to keep it in mind.

Snowden should face the music; he broke the law

CHAFEE: The courts have ruled that what he did was say the American government was acting illegally.

CLINTON: He broke the laws of the United States. He could have been a whistleblower. He could have gotten all of the protections of being a whistleblower. He could have raised all the issues that he has raised. And I think there would have been a positive response to that.

Q: Should he do jail time?

CLINTON: He stole very important information that has unfortunately fallen into a lot of the wrong hands. So I don't think he should be brought home without facing the music.

O'MALLEY: Snowden put a lot of Americans' lives at risk.

SANDERS: I think Snowden played a very important role in educating the American people to the degree in which our civil liberties and our constitutional rights are being undermined.

OpEd: More aggressive than most Dems on foreign policy

Clinton, the likely front-runner for the Democratic nomination if she runs, has built a reputation for being more aggressive on defense issues than some in her party. She supported the 2003 invasion of Iraq, though she now says it was a mistake, and she recently criticized President Obama for not moving more quickly to arm moderate rebel groups in Syria, saying the decision created a vacuum that allowed extremists to thrive.

NATO essential for evolving threats of the 21st century

I thought NATO remained essential for meeting the evolving threats of the 21st century. America can't and shouldn't do everything by ourselves; that's why building partnerships around common interests and goals was so important. NATO was still our most capable partner.

In 2011 we were able to show what a relevant 21st-century NATO looks like as the Alliance led the military intervention to protect civilians in Libya. The US provided unique capabilities but our allies--not us--flew 75% of the sorties. That was a reversal of the distribution of labor a decade before, during NATO's intervention in Kosovo, when the US was responsible for 90% of the bombing.

Balance lower military & higher diplomacy budget

Smart Power: blend of military power and soft power

The Republicans had been preoccupied with military power. Democrats' intellectual leaders wrote about the importance of America's "soft power"--the influence of its intangible values, ideas, mass culture and educational institutions. In 2005 the Center for American Progress put together a proposed new national security strategy for the US that was given the name "Integrated Power": it called for a blend of military power and soft power. Eventually, the Democrats came up with another phrase, "smart power," that convened well their convictions that the Bush Republicans had been dumb. Hillary Clinton would eventually make "smart power" the catchphrase for her first major speech as secretary of state.

Whatever the right adjective was, Democrats' established leaders were still in favor of American power and they wanted to preserve it.

Long-held pro-defense spending stance; not a move to center

For Clinton, long-held positions, like a hawkish approach to military affairs, are taken as evidence of a shift. And the prevailing assumption is that when she breaks with some in her party (or even when she sticks with her party) it is for crass political purposes and not an outgrowth of genuine conviction.

Examine registering 18-year-old women for selective service

DODD: I don’t see a need for the draft. I don’t believe that is necessary. But if you are going to have one I think it ought to be gender neutral.

Q: If it did not necessarily mean military service, should the country examine registering women at 18?

CLINTON: Yes.

EDWARDS: Yes. But it’s absolutely crucial that we ask Americans to be patriotic about something other than war. As with John Kennedy’s call to action, I think we need a president who asks Americans to sacrifice.

KUCINICH: We have to say no to a draft.

BIDEN: Yes ,and there should be universal service.

OBAMA: Yes. Every young person should have that opportunity to serve and do something that is bigger than themselves.

RICHARDSON: Yes. And I outlined a plan two years of college tuition paid off by the government, one year of national service

National security is more important than human rights

A: The first obligation of the president of the US is to protect and defend the US. That doesn’t mean that it is to the exclusion of other interests. After 9/11, Bush had a chance to chart a different course, both in Pakistan and in Afghanistan, and could have been very clear about what our expectations were. We are now in a bind. It is not completely, but partly, a result of the failed policies of the Bush administration. Where we are today means that we have to say to Musharraf, “Look, this is not in your interest either; this is not in the interest of the US. It is not in your interest to either stay in power or stay alive.” When I was meeting with him earlier this year I asked him if he would accept a high-level presidential envoy to begin to negotiate some of these issues. He said yes. I called the White House, I asked them to send such a high-level envoy. They did not do it. They’re going to send one now.

FactCheck: Yes, in 2006 condoned exceptions on torture

But in a debate in New Hampshire last month, Sen. Clinton shifted her position, when offered a similar ticking time bomb case, responding, ”As a matter of policy, torture cannot be American policy, period.“ To our ears, that sounds like a reversal.

Wants to repeal don’t-ask-don’t-tell, but not until 2009

A: The very simple answer is we didn’t have a chance with the Republican Congress and George Bush as president. And I want to get it done when I’m president. I want to do it and have it be successful. I don’t want to try, in a Republican Congress, with a very negative president, and have it defeated. We’re talking, now that we have a Democratic Congress, about what steps we can take to sort of lay the groundwork so that when we do have a change in the White House, we will be able to move on that. But I just want to sort of put it into a broader context, because it’s one of my highest priorities. I came out against don’t-ask-don’t-tell in 1999. It was a transitional action that was taken back at the beginning of my husband’s administration.

Opposed to draft, but register women for draft

A: I do. I don’t support a draft. I think our all- volunteer military has performed superbly. But we’ve had women die in Iraq. We’ve had combat deaths of women in Iraq and Afghanistan. And I do think that women should register. I doubt very much that we’ll ever have to go back to a draft. But I think it is fair to call upon every young American.

Forgive student loans for universal national service

9/11: Got $20B to rebuild lower Manhattan

With each passing day that week, Hillary seemed to grow more comfortable in her role as an energized street fighter for a shattered city. She was inevitably overshadowed by Mayor Giuliani, who would be acclaimed as “America’s Mayor” for his resolve in lower Manhattan. And yet, for many New Yorkers, the images of Hillary fighting for the $20 billion in federal assistance for lower Manhattan, and standing atop the rubble with the president and Mayor Giuliani, dispelled any lingering doubts that she was a carpetbagger celebrity politician with few authentic toes to her new home state.

Served on Armed Services Committee & was always prepared

Hillary sits on three Senate committees--Armed Services, Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, and Environment and Public Works.

Hillary landed her most important post, a slot on the Armed Services Committee, after the 2002 midterm elections. It was a conscious decision to burnish her national-security resume after September 11.

Hillary had previously impressed the army’s vice chief of staff, Gen. John Keene, one of the architects of the invasion of Iraq, with her grasp of military culture. Hillary learned how to fit into a community that had long harbored hostility toward her husband.

Hillary’s service on the Armed Services Committee enabled her to reach out to the military. It also allowed her to travel on official business to war zones

Fund first responders with extra $1.7 billion

We can’t get the resources to match the rhetoric. In this latest budget, the president is proposing to cut funds for first responders to the tune of $1.7 billion. The way I see it, saying you believe in homeland security without funding first responders is like saying you believe in building a hospital without doctors and nurses. If we don’t fund you, we’re not funding our first line of defense, and we’re going to need to work together to make that happen.

Marshal resources against proliferation of nuclear weapons

Our troops are stretched; so increase size of military

Muscle, not rhetoric, leads to strong homeland security

Leadership role on Senate Armed Services Committee

At age 27, tried and failed to enlist in Marines

"So I walked into our local recruiting office, and I think it was just my bad luck that the person who happened to be there on duty could not have been older than 21. He was in perfect physical shape. So I sat down and I said I didn't know whether I thought active duty would be a good idea; reserve, mayb National Guard, something along those lines.

"This young man looked at me and he said , 'How old are you?' I said, 'Well, 27.' I had these really thick glasses on. He said, "How bad's your eyesight?" I said, 'It's pretty bad.' And he said, 'How bad?' So I told him. He said, 'That's pretty bad.'

"And he finally said to me, he said, 'You're too old. You can't see. And you're a woman.' This young man was a Marine. He said, 'But maybe the dogs [the Army] would take you.' "

Send 70% of homeland security funding to cities & counties

What would constitute a good, old-fashioned American solution to the danger of a chemical, nuclear, or biological attack? A document from her office explains that the senator "introduced the Homeland Security Block Grant Act, which provides that 70% of homeland security funding should go directly to mare than 1,000 cities and counties across the US. The remaining 30% will be sent to the States, which will serve as a pass-through directed to smaller communities.

Thus the bulk of homeland security spending would go to local funding for police, fire, and other local first providers in homeland defense.

Supports funding research on missile defense

Mothers in military should have access to daycare

Aside from their experience with day-care facilities, the military services provide quality control techniques such as surprise inspections, a feature Hillary would incorporate into her model day-care bill, even private providers, even women who cared for neighborhood children in their own homes, would be subject to unannounced visits by federal inspections.

Nixon should have been impeached for bombing Cambodia

A safe world needs the nuclear test ban treaty

Libyans refused much of what US offered as help

FactCheck: 7 official reports on Benghazi over 3-year period

• State Department Accountability Review Board report on Dec. 20, 2012
• Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs report on Dec. 31, 2012
• Five House Committees joint interim report on April 23, 2013 (interim report by Republicans only)
• FBI report on May 2, 2013 (investigation still ongoing)
• Senate Select Committee on Intelligence report on Jan. 15, 2014
• House Select Committee on Benghazi: three hearings & 29 witnesses since its creation on May 8, 2014 (interim progress report released on May 8, 2015)

FactCheck: Dozens of U.S. diplomats killed during Bush terms

• 1/22/2002. US Consulate in Calcutta, India: 5 killed.
• 6/14/2002. US Consulate in Karachi, Pakistan: 12 killed.
• 2/28/2003. US Embassy in Islamabad, Pakistan: 2 killed.
• 5/12/2003. US Compound in Riyadh, Arabia: 36 killed (9 Americans).
• 7/30/2004. US Embassy in Tashkent, Uzbekistan: 2 killed.
• 12/6/2004. US Consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia: 9 killed.
• 3/2/2006. US. Consulate Karachi, Pakistan (again): 4 killed (one Diplomat).
• 9/12/2006. US Embassy in Damascus, Syria: 4 killed.
• 3/18/2008. US Embassy in Sana'a, Yemen: 2 killed.
• 7/9/2008. US Consulate in Istanbul, Turkey: 6 killed.
• 9/17/2008. US Embassy Sana'a, Yemen (again): 16 killed.

More Benghazi hearings ok only to learn what to do better

CLINTON: Well, that's going to be up to the people running the hearing.

Q: If they ask you, you'll go?

CLINTON: Well, we'll see what they decide to do, how they conduct themselves, whether or not this is one more travesty about the loss of four Americans or whether this is in the best tradition of the Congress, an effort to try to figure out what we can do better.

Dozens of Benghazi attackers had dozens of motives

On the President's actions during the Benghazi attack: Obama "gave the order to do whatever was necessary to support our people in Libya. It was imperative that all possible resources be mobilized immediately. When Americans are under fire, that is not an order the Commander in Chief has to give twice. Our military does everything humanly possible to save American lives--and would do more if they could. That anyone has ever suggested otherwise is something I will never understand."

Benghazi security was simply inadequate in a dangerous city

On the claim that the investigation of the attack was rigged since Clinton appointed some of the Board members and she was not interviewed, she writes that they "had unfettered access to anyone and anything they thought relevant to their investigation, including me if they had chosen to do so."

Benghazi talking points were written by CIA for Congress

The talking points have been a focus of Republican critics, who insist they stemmed from the White House [as spin on] a terrorist attack on the eve of Obama's reelection. "Susan stated what the intelligence community believed, rightly or wrongly, at the time," Clinton writes. "That was the best she or anyone could do. Every step of the way, whenever something new was learned, it was quickly shared with Congress and the American people. There is a difference between getting something wrong, and committing wrong. A big difference that some have blurred to the point of casting those who made a mistake as intentionally deceitful."

Benghazi: focused on rescue & prevention, not retrospection

"In yet another example of the terrible politicization of this tragedy, many have conveniently chosen to interpret" that phrase "to mean that I was somehow minimizing the tragedy of Benghazi. Of course that's not what I said," she writes. "Nothing could be further from the truth. And many of those trying to make hay of it know that, but don't care."

She adds, "My point was simple: If someone breaks into your home and takes your family hostage, how much time are you going to spend focused on how the intruder spent his day as opposed to how best to rescue your loved ones and then prevent it from happening again?"

Benghazi: Figure out what happened to prevent repeating

Benghazi will be the go-to bludgeon for Republicans if and when Clinton tries using her experience at State to run for president. Republicans are liable to use Benghazi as a wedge to pry back her stately exterior, goading her into an outburst, once again revealing the polarizing figure who saw vast right-wing conspiracies.

Congress' tight security money partly caused Benghazi

A: The accountability review board made a set of recommendations. We are embracing and implementing all of them. Now, it's not all a question of money. You have to have the right people making the right decisions. But money is a factor. And ever since the Bush administration, our requests for security monies from Congress have not been met. So you've had to make priority decisions. I am determined to leave the State Department safer and stronger.

Q: Do we go back to Benghazi?

A: This was the heart of the Libyan revolution. We knew that there were dangerous people in and around Benghazi. So there were very important reasons why we were there, not just the State Department, but other government agencies. Whether or when we go back will depend upon the security situation. But I hasten to add that I have dangerous posts all over the world. We have people in incredibly high-threat environments.

Benghazi was a tragedy, but we get it right 99% of the time

Let's also remember that administrations of both parties, in partnership with Congress, have made concerted and good faith efforts to learn from the tragedies that have occurred, to implement recommendations from the Review Boards, to seek necessary resources, and to better protect our people from constantly evolving threats. And it's what we are doing again now. I take responsibility. Nobody is more committed to getting this right. I am determined to leave the State Department and our country safer, stronger, & more secure

Described Benghazi as "armed militants" in "act of terror"

You may recall that in that same period, we also saw violent attacks on our embassies in Cairo, Sanaa, Tunis, and Khartoum, as well as large protests outside many other posts where thousands of our diplomats serve. So I immediately ordered a review of our security posture around the world, with particular scrutiny for high-threat posts. I also appointed the Accountability Review Board led by Ambassador Pickering and Admiral Mullen so that we could more fully understand what went wrong and how to fix it. I have accepted every one of their recommendations. Because of the effort we began in the days after the attacks, work is already well underway.

We responded to Benghazi immediately, and for the long run

The very next morning, I told the American people that heavily armed militants assaulted our compound. I vowed to bring them to justice, and I stood with President Obama in the Rose Garden as he spoke of an act of terror.

It's also important to recall that in that same period, we were seeing violent attacks in our embassies, as well as large protests outside many other posts where our thousands of our diplomats serve. So, I immediately ordered a review of our security posture around the world with particularly scrutiny for high threat posts.

Worked with Libya before Benghazi, but they had no capacity

CLINTON: I had no knowledge of specific security requests. With regard to the situation in Libya, there were a number of meetings about this transition to elections.

RUBIO: At the Oct. 2011 & March 2012 meetings, did this issue come up with regards to the inability of the Libyan government to protect our diplomatic institutions?

CLINTON: We talked a great deal about th deteriorating threat environment in Libya.

RUBIO: Was there a specific conversation with regards to the inability of Libya to meet their obligations to provide security?

CLINTON: Oh, absolutely--a constant conversation. And what I found with the Libyans was willingness, but not capacity.

RUBIO: Before the attack, what had we done to help them build their security capacity?

CLINTON: Well, there's a long list, filled with training, with equipment, with planning that they had not done before.

If you are on no-fly list, you shouldn't have a gun

Work with Muslim countries against ISIS; not against Islam

A: I've heard this question from a lot of Muslim-Americans because there's been a lot of very divisive, dark things said about Muslims. It's very short-sighted and dangerous to be engaging in the kind of demagogic rhetoric of Trump. We need American Muslims to be part of our eyes and ears on our front lines. I've worked with a lot of different Muslim groups around America. I've heard how important it is for them to feel that they are wanted and included and part of our country, part of our homeland security, and that's what I want to see. I intend to defeat ISIS, to do so in a coalition with majority Muslim nations. Right now, a lot of those nations are hearing what Trump says and wondering, "why should we cooperate with the Americans?" This is a gift to ISIS and the terrorists, violent jihadist terrorists. We are not at war with Islam.

My priorities are to deport criminals and terrorists

Close Guantanamo detention center

Clinton was put on the spot when the president announced a new plan to shut down the U.S. detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and transfer dozens of high-risk terrorist detainees to maximum security prisons in the United States, which could include the military facility in South Carolina. The plan immediately hit opposition from Republicans in Congress, who cited longstanding bipartisan opposition to bringing captured terrorists to the US.

"The president is trying to figure out what to do with people who are too dangerous to be released," Clinton said. "All I can hope is that the Congress will work with him."

FactCheck: No, ISIL doesn't cite Trump in recruitment videos

We checked, and it is not. ABC News reports that neither the White House nor National Security Council would back up Clinton's assertion.

According to Business Insider, "The Clinton campaign has since backpedaled slightly on its candidate's comments. A campaign spokesman pointed to a comment from an expert on ISIS propaganda that ISIS follows 'everything Donald Trump says' and points to Trump's proposed Muslim ban as proof that America hates Muslims. Clinton 'didn't have a particular video in mind' when she made the comment, said another campaign spokesman; Trump is being used by ISIS in social-media propaganda.

Adversaries of the future: terrorists as well as drone subs

Gov. O'MALLEY: This is a new era of conflict where traditional ways of huge standing armies do not serve our purposes as well as special ops, better intelligence and being more proactive.

Secretary CLINTON: We do have to take a hard look at the defense budget and we do have to figure out how we get ready to fight the adversaries of the future, not the past. But we have to also be very clear that we do have some continuing challenges. We've got challenges in the South China Sea because of what China is doing in building up military installations. We have problems with Russia: they allowed a TV camera to see the plans for a drone submarine that could carry a tactical nuclear weapon. So we've got to look at the full range and then come to some smart decisions about having more streamlined and focused approach.

2001: Called for wrath on those who attacked America on 9/11

Torture cannot be American policy, period

A: As a matter of policy it cannot be American policy, period. There is very little evidence that it works. Now, there are a lot of other things that we need to be doing that I wish we were: better intelligence; working to have more allies. But these hypotheticals are very dangerous because they open a great big hole in what should be an attitude that our country and our president takes toward the appropriate treatment of everyone. And I think it’s dangerous to go down this path.

Q: The guest who laid out this scenario for me with that proposed solution was William Jefferson Clinton last year. So he disagrees with you.

A: Well, he’s not standing here right now.

Q: So there is a disagreement?

A: Well, I’ll talk to him later.

There is no safe haven for the terrorists

Consistently supported tough anti-terrorism measures

Hillary has amassed a good legislative record on fighting terrorism. She has pushed hard for threat assessments on bioterrorism, to protect the food supply, promote benefits to children of terror victims, increase homeland security grants, investigate securing radioactive materials, require annual inspections of high-risk sites, identify potential terror sites, encourage bomb-scanning technology, and improve protection at our embassies. But none of these bills has passed.

[On spending bills], Hillary has proposed additional spending to improve military housing, keep open facilities on closed defense bases, upgrade armed forces medical readiness, and increase aid to blind veterans.

I despise terrorism and the nihilism it represents

I despise terrorism and the nihilism it represents, and I was incredulous when the NY Republican Party and Lazio campaign insinuated that I was somehow involved with the terrorists who blew up the Cole. They made this charge in a TV ad and an automatic telephone message directed to NY voters 12 days before the election. The story they concocted was that I had received a donation from somebody who belonged to a group that they said supported terrorists--“the same kind of terrorism that killed our sailors on the USS Cole.” The phone script told people to call me and tell me to “stop supporting terrorism.” This last-minute desperation tactic blew up, however, thanks to a vigorous response by my campaign and with help from former NYC mayor Ed Koch, who cut a TV commercial scolding Lazio.

Passed legislation to treat veterans’ traumatic brain injury

Proposed Federal Interoperable Communication & Safety Act

She proposed the Federal Interoperable Communications and Safety Act (FICS). She would create a new undersecretary for emergency communications and an “interoperability czar” to lead an Office of Emergency Communications. Her bill would require all state and local governments to implement statewide communications programs in order to be eligible for some Department of Homeland Security grants.

Voted NO on cutting $221M in benefits to Filipinos who served in WWII US Army.

Sen. CORNYN. The problem I have with this bill is that the US Treasury is not bottomless, and the funding that is being provided to create this new pension would literally be at the expense of US veterans. The $221 million that is addressed by Sen. Burr's amendment would actually go back in to supplement benefits for US veterans. And while we appreciate and honor all of our allies who fought alongside of us in WWII, certainly that doesn't mean we are going to grant pension benefits to all of our allies, [like] the British or the Australians. Vote for the Burr Amendment because certainly our American veterans should be our priority.

Voted NO on removing need for FISA warrant for wiretapping abroad.

A modified version, S.2011, failed; it called for amending FISA to provide that a court order is not required for the electronic surveillance of communication between foreign persons who are not located within the US for collecting foreign intelligence information, without respect to whether the communication passes through the US or the surveillance device is located within the US.

Opponents recommend voting NO because:

Sen. LEVIN: Both bills cure the problem that exists: Our intelligence agencies must obtain a court order to monitor the communications of foreigners suspected of terrorist activities who are physically located in foreign countries. Now, what are the major differences? Our bill (S2011) is limited to foreign targets limited overseas, unlike the Bond bill (S1927), which does not have that key limitation and which very clearly applies to US citizens overseas. Our bill does not. Now, if there is an incidental access to US citizens, we obviously will permit that. But the Bond bill goes beyond that, citing "any person." It does not say a "foreign person." We avoid getting to the communications of Americans. There you have to go for a warrant.

Proponents support voting YES because:

Sen. LIEBERMAN: I will vote for the Bond proposal (S1927) because we are at war, & there is increased terrorist activity. We have a crisis. This proposal will allow us to gather intelligence information on that enemy we otherwise would not gather. This is not the time for striving for legislative perfection. Let us not strive for perfection. Let us put national security first. We are going to have 6 months to reason together to find something better.

Voted YES on limiting soldiers' deployment to 12 months.

Proponents support voting YES because:

Sen. HAGEL: The war in Iraq has pushed the US Army to the breaking point. When we deploy our military, we have an obligation to ensure that our troops are rested, ready, prepared, fully trained, and fully equipped. Today's Armed Forces are being deployed repeatedly for increasing periods of time. This is quickly wearing down the troops and their families, impacting the mental and physical health of our troops. Further, these deployments are affecting the recruiting and retention rates of the military. For example, the Army reached only a little over 80% of its recruiting goal for June. This is the second month in a row that the Army has failed to recruit the number of new soldiers needed to fill the ranks. And this is with $1 billion in large cash bonus incentives.

Opponents recommend voting NO because:

Sen. KYL: Time in theater and dwell times should be a goal, rather than an absolute fixed requirement that becomes the policy of the US military determined by congressional action. By mandating a certain policy for deployment time or dwell time, the Congress is engaged in the most explicit micromanaging of what is obviously a function for the Commander in Chief and military commanders to perform. This is not something Members of Congress are knowledgeable about or would have the ability to dictate in any responsible fashion. It also would be unconstitutional. Clearly, the dwell times of troops or the amount of time in theater is an obligation of the Commander in Chief, not something for the Congress to determine.

Voted YES on implementing the 9/11 Commission report.

• I: Improving Intelligence and Information Sharing within the Federal Government and with State, Local, and Tribal Governments
• II: Homeland Security Grants
• III: Communications Operability and Interoperability
• IV: Emergency Management Performance Grants Program
• V: Enhancing Security of International Travel
• VI: Privacy and Civil Liberties Matters
• VII: Enhanced Defenses Against Weapons of Mass Destruction
• VIII: Private Sector Preparedness
• IX: Transportation Security Planning and Information Sharing
• X: Incident Command System
• XI: Critical Infrastructure Protection
• XII: Congressional Oversight of Intelligence
• XIII: International Cooperation on Antiterrorism Technologies
• XIV: Transportation and Interoperable Communication
• XV: Public Transportation Terrorism Prevention
• XVII: 911 Modernization
• XIX: Advancement of Democratic Values

Opponents recommend voting NO because:

One of the authors of the 9/11 Commission report said, the President's announced strategy should be given a chance to succeed. That is what I think we should do, give this plan a chance to succeed. Our troops in theater, our commanders, and the Iraqi leaders all believe they can see early signs of success in this program, even though it has just begun, and they are cautiously optimistic that it can succeed. I think it would be unconscionable for the Congress, seeing the beginnings of success here, to then act in any way that would pull the rug out from under our troops and make it impossible for them to achieve their mission.

Voted YES on preserving habeas corpus for Guantanamo detainees.

Sen. GRAHAM [recommending NO]: The fundamental question for the Senate to answer when it comes to determining enemy combatant status is, Who should make that determination? Should that be a military decision or should it be a judicial decision? That is something our military should do.

Sen. SPECTER [recommending YES]: My amendment would retain the constitutional right of habeas corpus for people detained at Guantanamo. The right of habeas corpus was established in the Magna Carta in 1215 when, in England, there was action taken against King John to establish a procedure to prevent illegal detention. What the bill seeks to do is to set back basic rights by some 900 years. This amendment would strike that provision and make certain that the constitutional right of habeas corpus is maintained.

GRAHAM: Do we really want enemy prisoners to bring every lawsuit known to man against the people fighting the war and protecting us? No enemy prisoner should have access to Federal courts--a noncitizen, enemy combatant terrorist--to bring a lawsuit against those fighting on our behalf. No judge should have the ability to make a decision that has been historically reserved to the military. That does not make us safer.

SPECTER: The US Constitution states that "Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it." We do not have either rebellion or invasion, so it is a little hard for me to see, as a basic principle of constitutional law, how the Congress can suspend the writ of habeas corpus.

GRAHAM: If the Supreme Court does say in the next round of legal appeals there is a constitutional right to habeas corpus by those detained at Guantanamo Bay, then Sen. Specter is absolutely right.

Voted YES on requiring CIA reports on detainees & interrogation methods.

Opponents recommend voting NO because:

I question the need for a very lengthy, detailed report every 3 months. We will probably see those reports leaked to the press.

This amendment would spread out for the world--and especially for al-Qaida and its related organizations--precisely what interrogation techniques are going to be used.

If we lay out, in an unclassified version, a description of the techniques by the Attorney General, that description will be in al-Qaida and Hezbollah and all of the other terrorist organizations' playbook. They will train their assets that: This is what you must be expected to do, and Allah wants you to resist these techniques.

We are passing this bill so that we can detain people. If we catch someone like Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, we have no way to hold him, no way to ask him the questions and get the information we need, because the uncertainty has brought the program to a close. It is vitally important to our security, and unfortunately this amendment would imperil it.

Voted YES on reauthorizing the PATRIOT Act.

A bill to clarify that individuals who receive FISA orders can challenge nondisclosure requirements, that individuals who receive national security letters are not required to disclose the name of their attorney, that libraries are not wire or electronic communication service providers unless they provide specific services, and for other purposes.

Opponents of the bill say to vote NAY because:
• Some may see the vote we are about to have as relatively trivial. They are mistaken. While the bill we are voting on makes only minor cosmetic changes to the PATRIOT Act, it will allow supporting the PATRIOT Act conference report that was blocked in December. Cosmetic changes simply don't cut it when we are talking about protecting the rights and freedoms of Americans from unnecessarily intrusive Government powers.
• The White House has tried to make life uncomfortable for Senators. It has suggested they are soft on terrorism, that they don't understand the pressing threat facing this country, that they are stuck in a pre-9/11 mindset. Those attacks should be rejected.
• We can fight terrorism aggressively without compromising our most fundamental freedoms against Government intrusion. The Government grabbed powers it should not have when it passed the original PATRIOT Act and we should not be ratifying that power grab today. The PATRIOT Act reauthorization conference report is flawed. S. 2271 pretends to fix it but I don't think anyone is fooled, least of all our constituents.
• Because the Republican leadership obstructed efforts to improve the bill, the "police state" provisions regarding gag orders remain uncorrected. The Senate should get down to the serious business of legislating real fixes to the PATRIOT Act.

Voted NO on extending the PATRIOT Act's wiretap provision.

Voted YES on restricting business with entities linked to terrorism.

• Empower the President under the Trading with the Enemy Act to prohibit US businesses and their subsidiaries from transacting with foreign businesses identified as having links to terrorism.
• Forbid US businesses and their subsidiaries from engaging in transactions with any foreign business whose parent country has been identified as a supporter of international terrorism.
• Require the President to publish a list of foreign businesses identified as having links to terrorism, and bans US ownership or control of foreign businesses engaged in transactions with such businesses.
• Call for US businesses to disclose in their annual reports any ownership stake of at least 10% in a foreign business that is itself engaging in transactions with a proscribed foreign business.

Voted YES on restoring $565M for states' and ports' first responders.

Federalize aviation security.

Establishes the Transportation Security Administration, including:
• civil aviation security, and related research and development activities;
• day-to-day Federal security screening operations for passenger air transportation and intrastate air transportation;
• policies, strategies, and plans for dealing with threats to transportation;
• domestic transportation during a national emergency, including aviation, rail, and other surface transportation
• management of security information, including notifying airport or airline security officers of the identity of individuals known to pose a risk of air piracy or terrorism or a threat to airline or passenger safety.

Rated 100% by SANE, indicating a pro-peace voting record.

Peace Action, the merger of The Committee for a Sane Nuclear Policy (SANE) and The Freeze, has effectively mobilized for peace and disarmament for over forty years. As the nation's largest grassroots peace group we get results: from the 1963 treaty to ban above ground nuclear testing, to the 1996 signing of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, from ending the war in Vietnam, to blocking weapons sales to human rights abusing countries. We are proof that ordinary people can change the world. At Peace Action we believe...

• That every person has the right to live without the threat of nuclear weapons.
• That war is not a suitable response to conflict.
• That America has the resources to both protect and provide for its citizens.

The ratings are based on the votes the organization considered most important; the numbers reflect the percentage of time the representative voted the organization's preferred position.

Sponsored bill maintaining role of women in armed forces.

OFFICIAL CONGRESSIONAL SUMMARY:

Expresses the sense of Congress that:
1. women play a critical role in accomplishing the mission of the Armed Forces; and
2. there should be no change to existing statutes, regulations, or policy that would have the effect of decreasing the roles or positions available to women in the Armed Forces.

1. Women have a prominent role in American military history, with involvement as far back as the American Revolution.
2. Opportunities for servicewomen have increased dramatically since 1948, when the Women's Armed Services Integration Act of 1948 gave women a permanent place in the Armed Forces.
3. The Department of Defense began to expand its programs on women in the Armed Forces in earnest in 1973.
4. From 1973 to 2005, the number of women as a percentage of the total force of the Armed Forces increased from only 2.5% to approximately 17%, with more than 200,000 women currently serving in the Armed Forces.
5. The admission of women to the service academies began in Autumn 1976 and has increased steadily so that women currently comprise approximately 16% to 19% of the incoming class each year at the service academies.
6. The current policy excludes women units whose primary mission is to engage in direct combat on the ground.

It is the sense of Congress that--
1. women play a critical role in the accomplishment of the mission of the Armed Forces; and
2. there should be no change to existing statutes, regulations, or policy that would have the effect of decreasing the roles or positions available to women in the Armed Forces.

LEGISLATIVE OUTCOME:Referred to Senate Committee

Sponsored bill for increased security of radiation sources.

OFFICIAL CONGRESSIONAL SUMMARY:

• Prohibits the export of a radiation source unless it has found specified requirements have been met.
• Establishes a mandatory tracking system for all radiation sources in the US.
• Establishes a task force to study the security of radiation sources from potential terrorist threats, including use of such radiation sources in a radiological dispersal device.
• Considers the impact on the availability of radiopharmaceuticals.
• Requires the a report to Congress on the location and status of all nuclear fuel exported by the federal government.

SPONSOR'S INTRODUCTORY REMARKS: Sen. CLINTON: Since Sept. 11, we have increased our focus on "dirty bombs," and rightly so. Most Americans are not aware of how common radioactive material is in our country. Often we think of warheads or rods used in nuclear reactors. However, we use less-radioactive materials in positive ways in our hospitals, research laboratories, food irradiation plants, and even in smoke detectors. And although these materials have beneficial uses, the fact is that some of them, in the hands of a terrorist, could be used to make a dirty bomb that could be used to contaminate a wide area in NYC or in many other places across the country. This legislation fills in remaining gaps to enable the U.S. to more effectively control radiation sources.

1. The bill would give the Nuclear Regulatory Commission the authority and the mandate to control Radium-226 and other naturally occurring radioactive materials that for historical reasons have remained outside of federal control.
2. The bill develops a "cradle-to-grave" tracking system to ensure that we know where radiation sources of concern are at all times.
3. The bill requires the establishment of import and export controls for radiation sources.

LEGISLATIVE OUTCOME:Referred to Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works; never came to a vote.

Extend reserve retirement pay parity back to 9/11.

Congress makes the following findings:
1. Since September 11, 2001, members of the reserve components of the Armed Forces have been sent into harm's way and fought alongside members of the regular components of the Armed Forces.
2. Between September 11, 2001, and December 7, 2007, more than 600,000 members of the reserve components have been mobilized in support of military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and for other contingency operations.
3. More than 142,000 members of the reserve components have been mobilized more than once during this same period.
4. On December 7, 2007, the conference report for H. R. 1585 offered an earlier retirement benefit for members of the reserve components who are mobilized in support of contingency operations.
5. The House of Representatives and the Senate agreed to the conference report on December 14, 2007.
6. However, the conference report only considers service performed after the date of the enactment, and this effective date fails to recognize the service and sacrifice made by members of the reserve components since September 11, 2001.

Improve mental health care benefits for returning veterans.

Honoring Our Nation's Obligation to Returning Warriors Act (HONOR Warriors Act): House version is H.R.6268; Senate versions are S.2963 and S.3008. Legislative Summary:

1. To improve and enhance the mental health care benefits available to members of the Armed Forces and veterans, to enhance counseling and other benefits available to survivors of members of the Armed Forces and veterans, and for other purposes.
2. Scholarship program for education and training of behavioral health care specialists for vet centers.
3. Eligibility of members of the armed forces who serve in operation Iraqi freedom or operation enduring freedom for counseling and services through vets centers.
4. Restoration of authority of vets centers to provide referral and other assistance upon request to former members of the armed forces not authorized counseling.
5. Treatment of suicides of certain former members of the armed forces as deaths in line of duty for purposes of eligibility of survivors for certain benefits.
6. Grants for non-profit organizations for the provision of emotional support services to survivors of members of the armed forces and veterans.
7. Pilot programs on awareness enhancement for members of the army regarding post traumatic stress disorder.

Restore habeas corpus for detainees in the War on Terror.

A bill to restore habeas corpus for those detained by the United States; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Sen. SPECTER. "I introduce this legislation, denominated the Habeas Corpus Restoration Act. Last year, in the Military Commissions Act, the constitutional right of habeas corpus was attempted to be abrogated. I say "attempted to be abrogated" because, in my legal judgment, that provision in the Act is unconstitutional.

"It is hard to see how there can be legislation to eliminate the constitutional right to habeas corpus when the Constitution is explicit that habeas corpus may not be suspended except in time of invasion or rebellion, and we do not have either of those circumstances present, as was conceded by the advocates of the legislation last year to take away the right of habeas corpus.

"We have had Supreme Court decisions which have made it plain that habeas corpus is available to non-citizens and that habeas corpus applies to territory controlled by the US, specifically, including Guantanamo. More recently, however, we had a decision in the US District Court applying the habeas corpus jurisdiction stripping provision of the Military Commissions Act, but I believe we will see the appellate courts strike down this legislative provision.

"The New York Times had an extensive article on this subject, starting on the front page, last Sunday, and continuing on a full page on the back page about what is happening at Guantanamo. It is hard to see how in America, or in a jurisdiction controlled by the United States, these proceedings could substitute for even rudimentary due process of law."

Establish global strategy to defeat al Qaeda.

A bill to require a report setting forth the global strategy of the United States to combat and defeat al Qaeda and its affiliates. Directs the Secretaries of Defense, State, and Homeland Security to jointly submit to Congress a report setting forth U.S. global strategy to defeat al Qaeda and its affiliates.