Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me time to speak on this important issue.

Madam Speaker, I oppose this rule. I think we are talking past each other, as the previous gentleman from Maine just indicated. We want the government to reopen, but we want something called border security. I am told that this bill has $1 billion in it for border security, but we are not going to build a wall.

Now, here is the thing that happens. Down in Arizona, where we live-- we don't live 2,000 miles away from that southern border where the immigration problem is that the illegal border crossings are monumental--we actually see the humanitarian crisis. That crisis exists when people, who are coming to America, they don't go through the ports of entry, they are going between the ports of entry, in some of the most rugged land and terrain in the world, coming down from the Sierra Madres in northern Mexico in the summertime, blazing heat of 120 degrees or more; in the winter time, the evenings cool down to the 20s.

I saw people, just yesterday, being shown on the news, who are getting ready to try to make this trek. They are carrying plastic grocery bags with their supplies. They are dressed casually. They have no comprehension of the danger that they are bringing to themselves when they are coming across. It is a humanitarian crisis. Do you know what a border wall would do? It would provide a deterrent.

In the San Diego-San Ysidro port of entry, when that border wall was created, crossings declined almost 90 percent. It forced people to a different place. They began crossing away from the ports of entry at San Diego over to Arizona and Texas. So we built a wall around the Yuma port of entry. Do you know what happened? Those crossings decreased 75 to 80 percent. They moved on to more dangerous places in the desert, down towards Nogales, between Nogales and South Bisbee, between Naco and the Douglas port of entry. More than 100 individual's bodies were found last year trying to enter. It is a humanitarian crisis.

The opioids that come across the southern border: 141 tons of heroin seized coming across the southern border last year; 140 tons of cocaine seized coming across the southern border.

When I hear people say border security, they start talking about drones and unmanned aerial vehicles and sensors and cameras. Guess what? That does not deter anyone. We get to watch the videos of people coming across. But do you know what a wall does? It channelizes people. It forces them to go to places where we can interdict them. We provide hundreds of millions of dollars of humanitarian aid to people who are risking their lives trying to enter this country.

If it wasn't so serious, I would find it laughable to hear folks say, ``We are putting $1 billion into this as border security,'' because they don't want a political victory for President Trump. It is not about political victories. It is about national security, it is about humanitarian concern, and you are not going to get a better bang for your buck than to build a border wall.

Madam Speaker, early next week, America marks the dark anniversary of the United States Supreme Court's decision of Roe v. Wade.

Since that date, over 60 million babies have been aborted. Those babies had no voice to defend themselves.

The tide is turning, though. Thanks to President Trump and a pro-life Congress the last 2 years, we have continued to take a stand for life in legislation, through executive action, and in the courts. There is much to do to make sure that every baby is protected under our law yet.

I am especially grateful that Arizona was recently recognized as the most protective of life in the United States. Thank you to all the officials and advocates who work tirelessly to make this happen.

Madam Speaker, I thank Representative Mitchell. I am grateful for this opportunity to highlight National School Choice Week, which will be next week, January 20 through 26.

Like many in Congress, I believe the path to success for our Nation's youth is through quality education. The best way to provide quality is to create competition in the education marketplace.

For decades, students and families had few options when they went to choose education for their children. Today, there is a flourishing education marketplace. Some States have erased school district lines, directly creating choice within their traditional public school systems. Many others have embraced charter schools and duel-enrollment programs, and still others have provided educational savings accounts for parents and allowed voucher programs to assist families with offsetting the cost of private school tuition.

Educational options should meet the variety of unique needs of students. I am glad to see leaders across the country understand those needs and promote policies that provide an abundance of options.

Nearly 30 years ago, my wife and I studied the options available to us as parents as we went to educate our children in Arizona. At that time, there were very few options. I took the required general certification test that allowed us to home educate our oldest children.

As our family and children grew, so did educational choice in Arizona. Our children are each unique individuals with varying talents, abilities, and interests. Homeschooling worked for some of our children, charter schools for others, and, even within the charter schools, different charter schools worked for different children. But each of our children received a quality education that allowed them to flourish and which prepared them for life.

Four of our children have graduated from college, the fifth has attended college, and our youngest is in her freshman year of college. My wife and I are pleased with their successes and are deeply appreciative of Arizona's liberal school choice policies that allow every child an opportunity to thrive and grow in a school that is the best fit for them.

Today, in Arizona, there are more than 550 charter schools, with 186,000 students enrolled in the 2016-2017 school year. That is an increase of 6,000 students, or almost 6 percent over the previous school year, and makes up about 17 percent of all of Arizona's public school students.

But school choice doesn't stop with charter schools in Arizona. We also offer scholarships funded by State tax credits to help make private schools more affordable, as well as education savings accounts that help more than 5,400 students and their families choose the educational option that is best for them.

I firmly believe parents and students should be in the driver's seat when determining which educational path best fits their needs. They can only do this if local, State, and Federal leaders continue to reduce involvement in education decisionmaking.

Again, I thank Representative Mitchell and the leaders here today and those who are working for school choice across this country, those who are fighting for policies that benefit students and their families.

Today's youth will be our future leaders in this great Nation, and even in the world. It is, thusly, imperative that we provide them with the highest quality education to ensure they have the foundation necessary to become the leaders we need.

Madam Speaker, today, I rise to congratulate all the Members of the Arizona Legislature who took their oaths of office to begin a new term this week.

The start of each legislative session is exciting: an opportunity to keep promises made to constituents and make Arizona a better place to work and raise a family.

As ever, legislators will face challenges that will impact millions of Arizonans. I look forward to working with my former colleagues, especially those in the east valley, for the benefit of our constituents.

I recognize and give special congratulations to incoming Senate President Karen Fann and House Speaker Rusty Bowers. I wish everyone in the Arizona Legislature, including staff, a productive legislative session in the months to come.

Madam Speaker, I thank my friend from Pennsylvania for organizing this.

To be honest with you, I really can't believe we still have to have this conversation. The idea that the United States of America should turn a blind eye to protecting its national borders violates one of the few responsibilities enumerated to the Federal Government in the Constitution, the one we just swore an oath to just a couple weeks ago, to ensure the security of our Nation and provide for its defense. How can anyone argue that we are safer as a nation by not having any idea who is entering our country today?

Unlike many Members of Congress, I was born and raised in southern Arizona, mere miles to the Mexican border, not too far away, an hour or so drive. I have met with Border Patrol agents and ranchers who live in the region several times alone recently. There is no other way to put this: The situation on the American side of the border is dire and equally as grave on the other side.

For 8 years under the Obama administration, the Federal Government effectively told Americans that their safety and their sovereignty were not important. They told Border Patrol and ICE agents that the jobs they were doing were essentially pointless, because the Obama administration was going to find as many ways as possible to prevent further border security and circumvent the immigration laws passed by Congress, including reducing the pay of Border Patrol agents.

If the House Democrats have their way, they will continue down this suboptimum, irresponsible path until it is simply too late.

I visited the 75-mile stretch of the border that crosses through one of Arizona's Indian reservations. Along the way, the Border Patrol agent who was guiding us pointed out drug shacks and lookouts that the cartels use to alert smugglers of the Border Patrol's presence. It is astounding, quite frankly.

Some will argue that there is fencing along many of those miles and try to convince you that the area is secure and no fencing is necessary. But let me tell you something, that is not true. The fencing consists of a single strand of barbed wire. There might be some Normandy barriers, those cross barriers, now and then, and there is some pole fencing, all of which easily can be walked over or stepped through. No one who has been there can argue with a straight face that the ability to walk across the border with little effort can be called secure.

On that same trip, I met with cattle ranchers near Nogales. Each of those families has encountered multiple illegal aliens on their property--in fact, on a regular basis. It is so grave that they set up cameras so they could capture footage of the illegal traffic. I have seen that footage; I have seen the videos. It is not groups of sweet mothers and children coming across. It is groups of armed, young men, with drugs strapped to their backs, 50-pound packages. They are wearing carpet shoes to disguise their footprints in the dirt.

I recently spoke with a rancher along the border. He has told me that he has been victimized by three home invasions and more than a dozen burglaries, not counting the near constant trespasses that victimize his family.

I am curious to know what the open border advocates think about that kind of traffic. Should known drug smugglers have the freedom to traipse across private property and come into America? These Americans own their land, but the House Democrats see no reason to protect them from this invasion.

To any Member of the Chamber who disagrees with border security, or doesn't know how to describe it, including with a wall, how would you feel about constant trespassing and vandalizing of your own property? Don't you think the government should do something about it, or should we just turn a blind eye?

During a more recent trip, I had lunch with about 15 rank-and-file Border Patrol agents working in southern Arizona. These are the men and women defending our borders every day. They are putting their lives on the line, chasing after armed drug smugglers and being assaulted by illegal aliens they encounter.

By the way, just a couple of weeks ago, there was one attacked who had his face broken open by a rock after he was bitten and punched and attacked. Let me tell you, it leads to low morale in the agency.

They are the only DHS law enforcement agency that received a pay cut under the previous administration, and we can't fund them back yet. I don't understand that.

When they hear Members of Congress condemn the work they are doing and advocating instead for lawlessness and open borders, these agents have little incentive or motivation to continue fighting for our Nation's security.

This morning, I stood, like others have mentioned, with Angel Families who have lost loved ones. Two of them are in my district, the families of Brandon Mendoza and Grant Ronnebeck. They have suffered unjust harms. They have lost their children.

When I hear the gentleman from California say, oh, we can't get to the Smithsonian museum, well, for these people, their children will never get to the Smithsonian museum. They will mourn, and they do grieve. I am thankful for them standing up.

I will just tell you, ladies and gentlemen, there is a crisis on the border. We must deal with this with courage.

I call on my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to quit being obstructionists. We have to fund a border wall and the border security asked for.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend the just completed chairmanship of Maricopa County Supervisor Steve Chucri and to congratulate the incoming chairman, Supervisor Bill Gates.

Maricopa County is the Nation's fastest growing county, and Steve Chucri has had a lot to do with our success. He has led efforts on the board of supervisors to create a healthier urban environment, foster more job connections, fight homelessness, and sustain good governance. We are thankful for his service as chairman of the board of supervisors.

Incoming chairman is Supervisor Bill Gates, and I congratulate him on his new post. I know he will continue to lead Maricopa County well throughout this next year.

I am grateful for individuals like Steve Chucri and Bill Gates who help to make Maricopa County an attractive destination to millions of men, women, and children.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to highlight the distinguished career of Jay Tibshraeny, who has served the community of Chandler, Arizona, for more than 30 years. He has just completed his seventh term as mayor after being elected as a judge in the Maricopa County Justice Court. The city of Chandler experienced tremendous growth under Mayor Tibshraeny's leadership.

Mayor Tibshraeny has not only served in office for decades, he has faithfully served his community his entire life. Chandler would not be the same without his presence and his tireless efforts to leave his city better than when he found it.

Madam Speaker, Chandler will miss his leadership. It was my honor and privilege to work with him for the benefit of our constituents. I wish him and his family the best in their next chapter of life.

Mr. Speaker, I am grateful that my colleagues are here standing up for the crisis, to solve the crisis on the border.

Securing the United States and the American people, this border, is a fundamental, constitutional responsibility of the Federal Government. We have Members of the House and Senate who are still unwilling to ensure we have control over our borders, unwilling to ensure we know who enters the United States, and unwilling to enforce our immigration laws.

Some of the opposition has forgotten their previous support for border walls back then, before they didn't fundamentally disagree with border security or the border wall. But now they simply don't want President Trump or elected Republicans to get a win. What they want is open borders.

In 2006, some of the Democrats still in the Senate today, including Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, voted in favor of the Secure Fence Act to build a southern border wall.

For now, Republicans still control Congress. Rumor is that our leaders are negotiating a deal to avert a shutdown and fund the government through February 8. Once again, we are kicking the fight for border security down the road.

When are we going to stand up and fight, if not now?

Our coalition of Members here have drafted an amendment that would allow us to deliver on our promise to make the necessary policy changes to end catch and release, increase the number of immigration judges, and provide $5 billion in border wall funding.

In all of the debate about borders and illegal immigration, many of the headlines focus on those who have come here illegally, but I urge you to remember people on the American side of the border. Remember the ranchers and residents living along the border who are impacted by smuggling and trafficking that goes on because of our lack of will in this body. Remember our Border Patrol agents who risk their lives every day trying to keep us secure.

I urge my colleagues in the House and our leadership to think about what is best for America. Is it the status quo, or is it standing up to fight for the security and sovereignty of our Nation?

Clearly, we must stand up and fight now. I urge my fellow Members to support funding for the border wall before January 3 comes; and if we have to, I am willing to stay here to make sure that happens.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the special work of Marc Community Resources of Mesa, Arizona. Marc is a nonprofit organization dedicated to providing education, rehabilitation, and other social services to children and adults with physical disabilities and developmental health challenges.

Since 1957, Marc has been committed to helping those with disabilities live, learn, work, and play. Each year, Marc helps more than 4,000 people overcome the limitations of their disabilities to reach their full potential.

The challenges that the disabled face in day-to-day life are often underappreciated, and their achievements in overcoming those challenges are frequently overlooked.

I am sure the employees of Marc would say that it is their patients who are the real heroes; and while they courageously battle severe challenges, today I rise to commend the heroic efforts of Marc Community Resources--its owners, managers, and employees--in the work they do. I am grateful for their service to Mesa and the entire east valley.

Mr. Speaker, today, I honor the life of my constituent Mr. James Nelson. Mr. Nelson dedicated his life to public service, his community, and first and foremost, his family. He will be greatly missed by everyone that was lucky enough to know him in the East Valley.

James grew up in Tempe, Arizona where he played football and basketball for Marcos De Niza High School. His competitive nature and out-going personality led to future success in leadership positions in his 25-plus-year career serving others. He began his fire service career in the East Valley and was a founding member of the Gilbert Fire Department in 1993. For most of his professional life he served as Captain, later promoted to Battalion Chief.

James was a consummate professional and mentor to many other fire fighters. It is hard to imagine how many lives have been improved because of James' guidance and advice. He was a pillar of strength for his family, friends, and the fire service. I express my sincere condolences to his wife Kerry, his three daughters, Sydney, Shelby, and Shealy, his parents Ken and Nancy Nelson, his brother Paul Nelson, his sisters Sherri Nelson and Tricia Nelson and his other surviving family members.

Mr. Speaker, today, I rise today to honor Christopher Evans, a teacher at Basha High School in my district.

Mr. Evans was one of 52 Americans who received the James Madison Fellowship, which is awarded to one distinguished educator from each State. This award recognizes exceptional teachers of American history and social studies seeking ``to strengthen their knowledge of the origins and development of American constitutional government, and to expose our future leaders to the knowledge of the Nation's constitutional heritage.''

I congratulate Mr. Evans on this achievement, and I know he has a bright future in my home State of Arizona.

Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Chair, I thank Chairman Frelinghuysen and Chairman Calvert for their efforts on this legislation and, in fact, the entire committee.

My amendment is simple. It re-prioritizes taxpayer money by moving a small amount of funds from the Bureau of Land Management land acquisition account and redirecting them to the National Park Service maintenance backlog account.

Over the years, Congress has sent billions of dollars into these accounts, allowing the Federal Government to acquire roughly 640 million acres. Today the Federal Government owns about 28 percent of all the lands in the United States, including about 40 percent of the land in my home State of Arizona.

This ownership and the subsequent management of the 640 million acres comes at a great expense to the American taxpayer and poses overwhelming challenges for land managing agencies. The deferred maintenance backlog for the National Park Service--and I have here a list of those--totals nearly $12 billion. The National Mall alone is almost $800 million in deferred maintenance, and the Grand Canyon National Park is $350 million in deferred maintenance.

The list goes on and on.

Given these challenges, it defies logic that we would continue to spend millions of dollars to acquire more land that we can't pay to maintain.

So I instead incur just $1.4 million of the net yield on this with my amendment to start this process of paying for the backlog.

Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert).

Madam Chair, we have a problem when we can't even agree on prioritizing $1.5 million additional money to maintain national parks. Washington, D.C., on the Mall alone, has $1 billion in maintenance backlog. And Arizona, for instance, has one-half billion dollars in maintenance. California has over $2 billion in maintenance backlog, and I could go on and on.

But that is not necessary because we all know that we need to re-fund the maintenance backlog, and I am only asking for $1.4 million of an additional $18 million that is going to the land acquisition fund.

Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from North Carolina for yielding time to me.

You know, an old Arizona farmer told me that when you put up a fence, the cow almost always goes over and leans on the fence to see how strong that fence is, because the cow wants to get to the other side. If the fence is strong, then it moves away, and you don't have that problem. But if your fence is a little bit loose in the wiring, it is going to go over, and that cow is going to get on out. And that is what has happened here.

What has happened here is we have had a loose fence. We have failed to demand the requirements be met as we have requested. It is not bullying. It is not bullying to request documents. It is not bullying to subpoena and use the right that we have to subpoena. That is not bullying anybody.

But I will tell you what the problem is--this resolution gets at the heart of it. It says that we are going to give you an extra 2 weeks. That is rebuilding the fence a little bit. That is rebuilding that fence a little bit and saying: We have oversight authority. You need to comply with that oversight authority.

So we are going to rebuild the fence. And I fully support this resolution, Mr. Speaker. But I will tell you what, I would enthusiastically support a resolution for contempt, because there has not been compliance, nor has there been adequate reason given for noncompliance.

So, I support this resolution 100 percent. I am going to be voting for it. I have cosponsored it. But I will tell you what, we need to be holding a resolution of contempt, because this body and its authority have been held in contempt.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

First of all, I commend Chairman Hensarling and the gentleman from Kentucky for their thoughtful efforts on this bill to put together a pilot program that is designed to help people who suffer this opioid addiction. I am grateful to them for their thoughtful efforts.

My amendment simply narrows the reporting requirements that are imposed on the Secretary. This does not proscribe or necessarily limit the parameters of the report, but it prevents unnecessary prognostication on the part of the Secretary, which I believe will allow for an accurate and valuable assessment at the conclusion of the pilot program's testing period.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today, along with my Arizona colleagues, to honor the life and sacrifice of U.S. Army Staff Sergeant Alexander W. Conrad from Chandler, Arizona, who was recently killed by indirect enemy fire while in support of Operation Octave Shield in Somalia.

Sergeant Conrad served as a human intelligence, noncommissioned officer and was assigned to the 1st Battalion, 3rd Special Forces Group.

Sergeant Conrad's decorated service included two tours in Afghanistan in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. He was posthumously awarded the Purple Heart and Meritorious Service Medal.

Mr. Speaker, Sergeant Conrad was one of Arizona's finest. He fought to free the oppressed and to ensure that all Americans live out their days in liberty.

Please keep his family, friends, and comrades in your prayers.

Mr. Speaker, I now ask that Members please join me and my Arizona colleagues for a moment of silence to remember U.S. Army Staff Sergeant Alexander W. Conrad.