As far as introducing new legislation, Rubio has been fairly quiet. So far, he has been responsible for one piece of legislation, an amendment to an air traffic control bill that would prevent the expansion of flight itineraries in countries that sponsor terrorism. Since becoming a senator in January, Rubio has voted in opposition of the implementation of health care reform through a number of resolutions and amendments, and has voted for extending provisions of the PATRIOT Act and blocking Transportation Security Administration employees from collective bargaining (of course, the involvement of the Koch brothers in the national fight over collective bargaining is well documented). That’s the extent of his U.S. Senate voting record, but he’s been vocal about his support for other bills, and it’s there that his benefit to Koch Industries comes into focus.

Koch Industries has three major operations in Florida: Georgia-Pacific, Flint Hills Resources and Koch Chemical Technology Group. Of those, the paper company Georgia-Pacific has come into the most heated conflict with environmental regulations. Flint Hills is an oil refinery operation that has been fined by the Environmental Protection Agency for violations of the Clean Air Act in the past, though it was also commended by the EPA in 2005 for cutting emissions. Koch Chemical Technology primarily makes pollution control equipment that can be used to ensure compliance with EPA regulations.

Rubio has stated his opposition to cap-and-trade regulations that would reward companies for limiting emissions and tax those that don’t. Cap and trade could have a major impact on the Flint Hills operation in Rubio’s backyard, but it could have even larger repercussions for Koch Industries outfits in other states. Koch Industries has spent hundreds of millions in the past in fines for EPA violations and costs incurred in bringing factories up to emissions standards.

And as a pitched battle continues to heat up in Florida over Georgia-Pacific’s objections to EPA water standards, Rubio has made known his opposition to the same. The sugar conglomerate Flo-Sun, another major backer of Rubio’s campaign, has also had its own battles with the EPA over water pollution standards. Rubio has couched his opposition to regulations in terms of job creation, but opponents have argued that failing to enact environment regulations could ultimately cost jobs for Florida in some of its flagship industries (more on that later).

It’s unclear how Rubio’s constituents feel about his vigorous opposition to EPA regulation, as no polls have been conducted by an independent body to find out. The only poll available is one showing 68 percent of Floridians and climbing oppose EPA water regulations; however, the poll simply asked if Floridians would oppose water quality regulations if they resulted in a $700 increase in the average home water bill. That number was based on industry estimates of industrial wastewater regulation costs that the EPA has disputed.

In November, the Florida Independent obtained an internal email from Phil Coram, a deputy director of water resource management with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Coram stated that industry estimates were overblown because they were based on the wrong assumption that all wastewater sites would have to comply with regulations; that they left out the fact that many companies would have cheaper options than expensive conversions for managing their wastewater; and that “some of their math is wrong.” This is coming from within a state agency that has itself been accused of kowtowing to industry interests.

On Rubio’s own site, he uses a Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services figure stating that the wastewater regulations in question would cost over $1.1 billion annually. Such an annual cost, though a great deal higher than EPA estimates, would result in an annual water bill increase of around $157 if divided evenly among all households in Florida — far lower than $700, but even the lower figure doesn’t account for the fact that industrial facilities use a lot more water than individuals, nor does it account for the vast number of seasonal households in Florida whose owners live elsewhere for large parts of the year. Indeed, the EPA figures reported by the St. Johns Riverkeeper may not be far off: an increase more on the order of $40 to $71 a year for the average taxpayer.

Meanwhile, the Florida Independent today reports that failing to implement wastewater regulations would result in a proliferation of toxic algae that would have devastating effects. The brunt of these effects would be felt by individuals living near waterways and by small businesses in the food, hospitality and tourism industries that stake their livelihoods on the integrity of Florida’s environment.

“The talent and knowledge John has acquired in more than two decades of service with the F.B.I. will make him a valuable asset to our administration’s efforts to strengthen the security and screening measures at our airports. I am grateful that he has agreed to take on this important role, and I look forward to working with him in the weeks and months ahead.”

Importantly, Pistole’s tenure at the FBI gave him a background in both counterterrorism and civil rights, a mixture increasingly important as the administration has previously waded a toe — since retracted — into ethnic profiling at airports. Pistole also spent last week on the Hill briefing lawmakers on the latest in the Faisal Shahzad attempted car-bombing case, so he might be a reassuring figure in Congress for a crucial position.

Apparently someone told Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) that it’s bad optics to keep a hold on Errol Southers, the TSA administrator-designate, because of DeMint’s hostility to organized labor. So now they’re turning to a more legitimate basis for the hold: Southers’ inconsistent answers about the time in the late 1980s when he inappropriately accessed a federal database to spy on the man his wife cheated on him with. Southers, a former FBI agent, both alerted the Senate to his inconsistencies and called them “inadvertent.” He clearly needs to explain further.

But are we to believe the GOP is actually concerned that the TSA chief might be inappropriately aggressive in violating terror suspects’ privacy? That this is something the Republicans in the Senate, who lined up behind the Bush administration’s warrantless surveillance programs, ever cared about? And let’s be real: are they not going to cut some slack to a guy who abused his power one time to spy on his wife’s boyfriend? Whatever happened to the defense of marriage!

Still, watch the Democrats miss an opportunity to nail the GOP for putting hostility to working Americans ahead of national security.

The Intelligence Community received the President’s message today – we got it, and we are moving forward to meet the new challenges. The system did not catch Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab and prevent him from boarding an airliner and entering the United States. We must be able to stop such attempts.

The Intelligence Community has made considerable progress in developing collection and analysis capabilities and improving collaboration, but we need to strengthen our ability to stop new tactics such as the efforts of individual suicide terrorists. The threat has evolved, and we need to anticipate new kinds of attacks and improve our ability to stay ahead of them and protect America.

We can and we must outthink, outwork and defeat the enemy’s new ideas. The Intelligence Community will do that as directed by the President, working closely with our nation’s entire national security team.

Uh, “new challenges”? What’s new about terrorism? One hopes that was just a throwaway line. Because the only thing that’s going to be new here is the diminished standard for putting someone on the no-fly list. Or perhaps the increased volume of information intelligence analysts will have to synthesize. Or the acrimony and disillusionment from innocent Muslims treated by U.S. security services as potential threats — in the age of Obama, not Bush.

All travelers flying to the United States from other countries will face increased random screening, and all passengers from more than a dozen terrorism-prone nations will be patted down and have their carry-on bags searched, under new rules the Obama administration said will take effect Monday morning. [...]

The Transportation Security Administration notified airline carriers Sunday of the changes for all flights entering the United States — with an emphasis on a “full body pat-down and physical inspection of property” for all people who are citizens of or are flying through or from nations with significant terrorist activity. TSA officials declined to name all the “countries of interest” on Sunday, but confirmed that the directive applies to the State Department’s list of state sponsors of terrorism.

The Post says that “in practice,” that means someone flying through Yemen, as Abdulmutallab did, would be stopped and searched. But this wouldn’t have stopped, for instance, Richard Reid, a British citizen of Jamaican descent who tried to blow up American Airlines flight 63 in December 2001. And if these changes were put in place before Christmas, it would most likely be the pat-down and screening that stopped Abdulmutallab, since he’s a Nigerian citizen who traveled from Yemen, not, for instance, a Yemeni national, who would be likely to attract more scrutiny under the ambiguous “terror-prone” country rules. So wouldn’t it make more sense for the bulk of the effort to be placed on the physical inspection?

One wonders how far back an affiliation with “terror-prone” countries goes. If you’re a member of the Anbar Awakening in Iraq, perhaps you should prepare for American airline agents to treat you like you were back at a checkpoint in Ramadi in 2005. Or, maybe, you spent part of your childhood in terror-prone Indonesia …

Requires the secretary of homeland security to establish department-wide procedures by which to receive and analyze intelligence from state, local, and tribal governments and the private sector …
Authorizes funding levels for various efforts of Transportation Security Administration, including $1.99 billion for railroad security, $95 million for over-the-road bus and trucking security, and $36 million for hazardous material and pipeline security through fiscal year 2011…

Oh, and there’s this, too, at section 1307:

Directs the Secretary to: (1) begin to increase the number of explosives detection canine teams certified by TSA for purposes of transportation-related security by up to 200 canine teams by the end of 2010; and (2) encourage state, local, and tribal governments and private owners of high-risk transportation facilities to strengthen security through the use of such teams.

Don’t worry, though. DeMint is looking out for your security.

DeMint said in a statement that the attempted attack “is a perfect example of why the Obama administration should not unionize the TSA.” He wants Southers to clarify his stand on unionizing the TSA, a shift that Democrats support.

Without collective bargaining, DeMint said, the TSA has “flexibility to make real-time decisions that allowed it to quickly improve security measures in response to this attempted attack.”

If organized labor got involved, DeMint said, union bosses would have the power “to veto or delay future security improvements at our airports.”

He urged Obama to “re-think” supporting unionizing the TSA “and put the interests of American travelers ahead of organized labor.”

DeMint also wants a Senate floor debate and roll call votes, not confirmation by consent as the Democrats sought.

One of the reasons that Republicans were able to beat Democrats over the head with votes against creating the DHS in 2002 — Democrats having proposed the new department in the first place — is that Republicans successfully prohibited collective bargaining. The inability of Democrats to flip this back on Republicans, who are currently attacking the president for fumbling transportation security — especially because it would demand a floor fight that would end with Republicans voting against a new TSA head — is pretty hard to understand.

Erroll Southers, an experienced, highly-qualified nominee, continues to be held up in the Senate by someone who obviously puts process ahead of progress.  If TSA is to become the kind of nimble, responsive organization the American people deserve in times like this, it will need a Senate-confirmed administrator.  If nothing else, the events of last week highlighted this lack of leadership.

Remember: DeMint is holding up the new TSA chief not because of any concerns over Southers’ qualifications. He’s holding Southers up because Southers is too pro-labor. Because the last thing you want for the safety of the nation’s airports is for the individuals responsible for their security to earn a fair wage.

Yes, the Transportation Security Administration — stalwart guardians of your airline security — doesn’t have an administrator at the moment. At a moment of heightened fears of plane-borne terrorism. The reason TSA exists in the first place. And why’s that?

The post remains vacant because Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., has held up President Barack Obama’s nominee in opposition to the prospect of TSA workers joining a labor union.

Now that is what you call a post-9/11 mindset. Who cares about terrorists when workers might bargain collectively?

Included among the information TSA posted were the limitations of x-ray machines at airports and the fact that only 20 percent of bags checked in are hand searched for explosives.  The document also revealed sample CIA, Congressional and law enforcement credentials — all of which experts say would be easy for any terrorist to duplicate.

DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano, testifying at the hearing, said that “the security of the traveling public has never been put at risk. The document that was posted was an out of date document.” Still, she acknowledged that the posting violating procedures, and promised that agency staff, as well as the inspector general, will look into how exactly that happened.

“I’ve directed that we do a review department-wide of all of our components to make sure that we are being rigorous and very disciplined on what is posted and what is not.”

This post has been updated.