David Price: “I've been listening carefully to the gentleman as he described his intentions in offering this amendment, and all I can…”

“I've been listening carefully to the gentleman as he described his intentions in offering this amendment, and all I can do, I think all any of us can do, is react to the amendment before us, not to hypothetical future amendments or future administrative actions. And on the face of it, I oppose this amendment. The bill provides $3.03 billion for screeners. This amendment would cut funding by $270 million. {time} 1510 If this amendment is accepted, TSA would need to lay off 5,000 screeners. That's 10 percent of the current screener workforce. It would also eliminate nearly all of the new screeners hired over the past 12 months. These are screeners that are needed to support, to operate new security equipment. Mr. Chairman, there's no way around it: this would decrease security. It would lead to longer wait lines just at a time when passenger growth is rebounding at our country's airports. We continue to hear from the intelligence community about aviation threats. These threats are becoming more and more ominous, more diversified. Why on earth would we want to cut back our screener force at this point? Now, the gentleman has talked about giving the Secretary discretion to somehow make up for this cut in the private screener force. But there is really nothing in this amendment that grants such discretion.…”