Tuesday, November 5, 2013
Bipartisan National Laboratories Mean National Security Act
Congressman Swalwell Introduces the Bipartisan National Laboratories Mean National Security Act - November 4, 2013
The following information is from the office of U.S. Representative Eric Swalwell:
U.S. Representative Eric Swalwell (CA-15) introduced H.R. 3438, the National Laboratories Mean National Security Act, to ensure the full resources of Department of Energy (DOE) labs like Lawrence Livermore and Sandia National Laboratories are clearly available to help states and localities secure our country.
The government-owned, contractor-operated structure of the national labs has caused some state and local recipients of federal homeland security grants to decline to utilize DOE labs because of a mistaken belief that these funds would be paid impermissibly to the federal government as opposed to contract operators.
“Lawrence Livermore, Sandia and our other DOE national laboratories are world-class scientific research and development institutions with expertise relevant to addressing our homeland security challenges,” said Swalwell. “States and localities should feel free to utilize these capabilities, but the unique structure of these labs means they aren’t always being used fully.
"It’s in our homeland security interest to remove this existing barrier and clearly establish in statute that national labs can work with recipients of key federal homeland security initiatives and grants.”
The research, expertise and knowledge of DOE labs are all directly relevant to addressing how to prevent and respond to attacks involving the worst threats, such as chemical, biological, and radiological weapons.
Swalwell was joined on the bipartisan bill by U.S. Reps. Mike Simpson (R-ID), Michelle Lujan Grisham (D-NM), Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM), Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Grace Napolitano (D-CA) and Bill Foster (D-IL). A similar bill passed the House of Representatives by voice vote in the 112th Congress but was not taken up by the Senate.
“We can’t let a lack of clarity prevent states and localities from consulting with the best and brightest at our national labs on issues as critical as our homeland security. This is commonsense legislation that would provide a boost to the safety of our communities,” Swalwell added.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts you viewed tbe most last 30 days
-
LGBT intolerance problem at Sandia? I was just checking glassdoor.com and noticed several comments suggesting intolerance to LGBT at Sandia...
-
So did you SSVSP and why? Give details.
-
“Raise a concern, get blackballed then lose your job and benefits…” “…instead of raising your concerns just leverage on your skills and go t...
3 comments:
"Homeland Security" will be the death of the national laboratories. A huge waste of taxpayer money spent to feed the new military/industrial complex, especially when it's spent in small chunks according to the whims of the funding agencies
"Homeland Security" is a concept and an agency that is the product of a crazed and paranoid country intent on doing itself in, in the name of "security." There is no action within the US that is necessary to preserve US national security. There will be isolated individual acts of violence, potentially involving even dozens of victims. but not affecting our national security one iota. There have been more deaths due to individual crazies with guns in malls, theaters, and schools than from any exterior threat since 9/11. Where was DHS during those? "Not their mission"?? Hah. "Land of the free and home of the brave"?? Hah again. Privacy and freedom are being eroded beyond repair. Does anyone care? If I hear one more person say "if you don't have anything to hide, why do you care about privacy?" I'm going to puke.
The Fourth ammendment states:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.[1]
Seems pretty clear to me. The government should keep their nose out of your business without "probable cause". Probable cause is ultimately determined by a court of law.
Post a Comment