Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise to commend a pioneer of Brownsville, Texas, on the occasion, of her 105th birthday.

Nora Rock will celebrate that birthday tomorrow; and her name belies her strength. She is a rock. That also describes her faith in the Lord; He is her rock.

Her family came to Brownsville in the aftermath of the Civil War. Her grandfather was part of the Union Army occupying Brownsville in the 1860s.

She is an amazing woman, a quiet, simple lady whose love in life is service to others. She believes her longevity is a gift from God, one which she repays by spending her long life helping others in her community.

She remembers going to military band concerts at Fort Brown--the Army fort around which Brownsville grew--as a teenager during World War I, and remembers the daily cannon firings during those troubled times.

Ms. Rock is a very nice and humble lady who is wholly devoted to her faith and the South Texas community. Her way is to help others in a private way, not a public way to win accolades. The look of happiness in the eyes of another is all the tribute she would want or need.

She is an extraordinary American who has seen the history of our Nation in the 20th Century from the front row. She says she is still so vibrant after 100 years because the Lord has seen fit to keep her on the earth, but also--she says with a twinkle in her eyes--because she loves chocolate.

Madam Speaker, I would imagine she would not have expected for a woman to occupy the Speaker's Chair for the U.S. House of Representatives during her lifetime; we are both glad to have the opportunity to see you there.

I ask Speaker Pelosi, and our colleagues, to join me in commending the long and beautiful life of Nora Rock.

Mr. Speaker, it was a dark day when this House strong- armed and bribed members into passing a prescription drug benefit for Medicare that served the pharmaceutical industry--rather than serving the seniors unable to afford prescription drugs.

Finding the way to fix the entire program will take us a while longer . . . but I am proud that today we are attacking one of the most egregious parts of that law, the portion that was designed as payback for the pharmaceutical industry. Paying the full cost of the prescription drugs makes the cost for this program astronomical; and the fact the law prohibits the government from negotiating for lower prices was particularly galling.

Now, in the first 100 legislative hours of the 110th Congress, we are passing this bill to cut the cost of health care and improve access to medicines by requiring HHS to negotiate with drug companies or lower drug prices for Medicare beneficiaries. This bill we consider today will certainly save millions of dollars taxpayers now pay to have a prescription drug benefit

Mr. Speaker, I am incredibly proud to stand today with you, with our colleagues, and with millions of seniors and U.S. taxpayers as we ensure that Medicare's drug component serves senior citizens, not the pharmaceutical lobby.

Madam Speaker, due to important congressional business, I was unable to vote during the following rollcall votes. Had I been present, I would have voted as indicated below: rollcall No. 12: ``no''; rollcall No. 13: ``yes''; rollcall No. 14: ``no''; rollcall No. 15: ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, I wish today to commend the 2006 ``Mr. Amigo,'' Lucero Hoganza Leon, chosen recently by the Mr. Amigo Association of Brownsville, TX, and Matamoros, Tamaulipas, in Mexico. Like Cher, Ms. Leon is popularly known only as ``Lucero'' among her many fans in the U.S. and Mexico. Each year the Mr. Amigo Association honors a Mexican citizen with the title of ``Mr. Amigo,'' and that person acts as a goodwill ambassador between our two countries.

The Mr. Amigo Award began in 1964 as an annual tribute to an outstanding Mexican citizen who has made a lasting contribution during the previous year to international solidarity and goodwill. ``Mr. Amigo'' presides over the annual Charro Days Festival.

The Charro Days Festival is a pre-Lenten event, much like Mardi Gras in New Orleans, held in Brownsville and Matamoros. Charro Days festivities last for several days; this year they will be February 25- 28 and will include parades and appearances by Lucero. Charro Days is an opportunity to enjoy the unique border culture of the Rio Grande Valley area.

As Mr. Amigo 2005, Lucero will head the international parade of Brownsville Charro Days and Matamoros Fiestas Mexicanas festivities.

During Charro Days, South Texans celebrate the food, music, dances, and traditions of both the United States and Mexico. The United States- Mexican border has a unique, blended history of cowboys, bandits, lawmen, farmers, fishermen, oil riggers, soldiers, scientists, entrepreneurs, and teachers.

The border has its own language and customs. On both sides of the border, there is a deep sense of history, much of which the border has seen from the front row. We have seen war and peace; we have known prosperity and bad times. Charro Days is a time for all of us to reflect on our rich history, to remember our past and to celebrate our future.

Lucero was chosen for this honor based on her accomplishments as an entertainer and her efforts for people with disabilities. Her philanthropic career started in December 1997 when she hosted 27 uninterrupted hours of a telethon to raise money for a rehabilitation center for the handicapped.

While Lucero has won many awards as an entertainer, she has also been named the recipient of the 2002 Double Eagle Leadership Award. She has recorded 20 albums, including ``Ocho Quince,'' and starred in 6 telenovelas in her career. Currently, she stars in the acclaimed telenovela ``Alborada.'' She co-hosted the seventh annual Latin Grammy Awards in early 2006.

During difficult times in our world, the Mr. Amigo concept unites sister cities on both sides of the border and sends a message that we are neighbors, and mends that trust, understand, and respect each other. We share a language, customs and during Charro Days, we take time to celebrate our distinctive culture.

I urge my colleagues to join me in commending Lucero, the 2006 Mr. Amigo, as well as the cities of Brownsville and Matamoros, for their dedication to international goodwill between the United States and Mexico.

Madam Speaker, since this House last met before Christmas, another South Texan from my Congressional District has fallen in battle in Iraq, and I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring this life lost in the service of our Nation.

Army SPC John Paul Barta, 25, was assigned to the 1st Battalion, 12th Cavalry Regiment, 3rd Brigade, 1st Cavalry Division out of Ft. Hood, Texas. He never saw Christmas Eve; he was killed in Buhriz, Iraq, about 30 miles north of Baghdad, during combat operations on Dec. 23.

Madam Speaker, each time we lose a soldier--a member of our American family--we lose a little piece of ourselves. Each time, it is just unbearable. Let me tell you more about this noble patriot who gave the last full measure of devotion to the nation he loved.

An exceptional athlete, Specialist Barta was remembered as a well- mannered and respectful young man. He attended Flour Bluff High School in Corpus Christi, excelling on both the baseball and football fields.

Throughout his 4-year teenage athletic career, coaches and teammates in both sports knew him as a go-to player who came through even when the odds were long. This star baseball player also gently mentored his teammates. From time to time he was known as a perfectionist.

And while he was a natural competitor depended upon by teammates for the big play, he confided to a friend months ago about the ever-present fear of serving in Iraq. He was humble and he was competitive; precisely the type of person you'd want to wear the sacred uniform of the United States.

Specialist Barta is survived by his wife, Eun Ji, of Killeen; his mother, Laurie Barta, brothers Josh and Billy Ray Barta, and grandparents Adolph Barta, of Corpus Christi, and Jackie and Larry Blake of Milton, FL.

Everyone in the greater South Texas community will miss him, but nobody will miss him like his family. We mourn with this family; we lift up our broken hearts in gratitude to his family, and we all want to see the end of the war in Iraq.

Madam Speaker, I ask the House to join me in honoring Army SPC John Paul Barta and his service on behalf of the United States and to offer our thanks and our deepest sympathy to the family of this warrior, who gave the last full measure of devotion to our Nation and the United States Army.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the long-awaited legislation this nation has desperately needed since the 9/11 attacks on our democracy . . . yet which was pushed to the back burner by the previous Congress.

I'm proud that--within the first 100 legislative hours of this Congress--we are considering this bill to make our Nation safer by implementing the 9/11 Commission's recommendations left out of the Intelligence Reform bill in 2004. The bill also goes beyond the Commission's recommendations by requiring, within five years, 100 percent scanning of U.S.-bound shipping containers.

I represent two major ports in South Texas--the Port of Brownsville and the Port of Corpus Christi, which also has a strategic sealift command--and the array of possibilities for terrorists to access our Nation through shipping containers is amazing and horrifying.

Implementing the Commission's recommendations will make us safer by enhancing homeland security, strengthening efforts to stop the proliferation of WMD, and promoting strategies to reduce the appeal of extremism, particularly in Muslim parts of the world.

Today, we are--at long last--making a number of substantial improvements to homeland security, including: distributing homeland security grants on the basis of risk alone; creating a stand-alone grant program for interoperable communications for first responders; requiring a 100 percent inspection of air cargo over the next 3 years; accelerating the installation of explosive detection systems for checked baggage; and mandating a strategic plan to deploy explosive detection equipment at passenger checkpoints.

Today's bill also offers provisions to prevent terrorists from acquiring WMD by creating a U.S. Coordinator for the Prevention of WMD Proliferation and Terrorism and a blue-ribbon commission to recommend further reforms. We also strengthen efforts to eliminate nuclear black- market networks, easily the greatest danger to the civilized nations of the world.

Through this bill we offer strategies to reduce the appeal of extremism by providing assistance for expanding modern educational programs for Arab and other Muslim youth around the world, as well as promoting economic opportunities, education reform, human rights, and democratic processes in the countries of the Middle East.

This is a good day for this nation . . . and when the president signs this bill into law, we will be a safer nation.

Mr. Speaker, this bill on the floor today represents the way we hope to proceed with our colleagues in the new Congress: bipartisan cooperation on matters important to the American people.

Democrats on the House Armed Services Committee moved quickly to ensure the lame duck Congress repealed some of the mistakes made in the just-passed Defense authorization bill.

Today we begin by reinstating the remarkably candid and useful office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction.

Democrats are talking to our colleagues and incoming leaders, and with the current leaders of Congress, attempting to take care of some of the most important things that have been ignored by Congress during this decade.

In the instance of trying to keep the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, we wanted to act quickly in the lame duck, so that one tiny component of the transparency we actually already have does not go away.

In the coming Congress we will be holding hearings to get a better understanding of what is actually going on in the field.

Transparency and accountability will be the watchwords of the day.

In order for this Congress to get the confidence of the American people, we must be painfully honest about everything that is going on . . . and let the chips fall where they may.

The only thing worse than wasting the taxpayer's money, is hiding that fact.

I thank Mr. Skelton for his leadership with Chairman Hunter.

Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, I am grateful we are considering this legislation to extend the date for termination of the Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, SIGIR. This office provides a hugely important function as a watchdog for fraud, waste, and abuse of funds intended for Iraq reconstruction programs.

The American taxpayer deserves vigorous and continuous oversight of how funds are being spent in Iraq. It is also important to the Iraqi people, for whom the American Government provided a generous package of development and reconstruction funds that have not always been spent wisely.

I have made 15 trips to Iraq and have seen firsthand the essential work done by this office. Congress clearly made a mistake in passing the fiscal year 2007 Defense Authorization Act allowing the SIGIR office to close prematurely.

This legislation will correct that mistake and also wisely require SIGIR to prepare a final forensic audit on all funds appropriated to the Iraq Relief and Reconstruction Fund, IRRF.

As chairman of the Government Reform Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats and International Relations, and working under the leadership of Committee Chairman Tom Davis, I have held several oversight hearings on contracting in Iraq.

We've investigated the failure to establish realistic requirements and to define contract terms and conditions, limited competition and insufficient agency oversight. Reports provided to us by SIGIR were invaluable.

We all recognize that the security situation in Iraq makes reconstruction especially difficult and dangerous. But the Government has a responsibility to the taxpayer to do all that it can to ensure that dollars are spent wisely and well.

We have a special responsibility to our soldiers and marines in Iraq. One of the most important reasons Congress appropriated money for Iraq reconstruction was to support our troops by showing the Iraqi people we wanted to help them build a new Iraq, and reduce the risk that an insurgency would develop and grow. We know the insurgency exists and sectarian violence has flared, but the importance of the projects funded through the IRFF has not diminished in the slightest.

Finally, I believe a strong watchdog office like SIGIR will help us to learn lessons about the realities of contracting in a post-conflict environment.

I am grateful my colleagues in the Senate, Susan Collins and Joseph Lieberman, offered this legislation. I also thank Mr. Skelton who offered this legislation in the House and recognized the need to continue SIGIR's mission.

Mr. Speaker, as Co-Chair of the Azerbaijan Caucus, I rise to congratulate one of our key democratic allies--the Republic of Azerbaijan--as it prepares to celebrate the 15th Anniversary of its independence on October 18.

Azerbaijan is one of the United States' leading allies on the war against terrorism, with the distinction of being among the first to offer our nation unconditional support; providing airspace and airport use for Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghistan. And, AzerbaIjan was also the first Muslim nation to send troops to Iraq. Though bilateral cooperation on terrorism issues between the United States and Azerbaijan predates September 11, 2001, our relations were strengthened following their immediate, and heretofore unwavering, support against the war on terrorism.

Azerbaijan cooperates with the United States within international and regional institutions including the UN, Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and NATO's Partnership for Peace program. Regionally, Azerbaijan works together with the United States within the framework of the Organization for Democracy and Development--GUAM which is comprised of Azerbaijan, Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine. GUAM was created as a political, economic and strategic alliance in order to collaboratively address common risks and threats and thereby strengthen the independence and sovereignty of its member states.

The Republic of Azerbaijan is a standout nation among the South Caucasus countries, with a population of 8 million people and an ambitious economic policy. During the last decade Azerbaijan has been implementing structural reforms and adopting numerous laws and legislative changes, paving the way toward further integration with in the global economy. The nation has been moving toward a more diversified economy to achieve sustainable growth and to meet the social and development needs of its population.

Diversification of the economy and ensuring the development of non- oil sectors is a priority for the government. This policy includes implementation of projects and programs that create favorable conditions for development of private entrepreneurship, attracting investment in non-oil sectors, creating new jobs, evaluation of potential industries and markets and development of infrastructure in the regions.

The last 15 years of independence has not been without challenges, but the country has grown stronger with each new challenge it faces. Let us today commend the Republic of Azerbaijan on their forthcoming 15th Anniversary celebrations. And, let us also commit ourselves to their continued development as a global partner against the terrorism, toward economic growth, diversification of energy resources, and strengthening stability and security in the region.

Mr. Speaker, I want to commend my colleague from Texas, Mr. Doggett, for his work in getting the McAllen courthouse named for my dear friend, our former colleague, Kika de la Garza.

It is fitting that after a long and distinguished career as a lawmaker, the McAllen courthouse, which dispenses justice in the Rio Grande Valley, will bear the name of the former Chairman of the House Agriculture Committee. Kika de la Garza was instrumental in passing many of the laws under which many people will be judged.

The former Chairman of the House Agriculture Committee is a son of South Texas and a man who understood completely the unique culture of the Rio Grande Valley and the culture of Capitol Hill.

While his expertise was in agriculture, Chairman de la Garza made a legendary lesson of how food was integral to our military warfighters. He famously asked the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee so long ago, ``How long can a submarine stay under water?''

After listening to a long and detailed discourse on the capabilities of submarines from the Armed Services Committee Chairman, Chairman de la Garza responded, ``That's not right, sir. A sub can only stay under water as long as the food supply lasts.''

Kika de la Garza is a giant in the history of the United States Congress, of South Texas and in the hearts of all of those of us who know and love him. It is a fitting tribute that this courthouse will bear the name of Kika de la Garza.

Mr. Speaker, while this bill provides important funding that is very late in coming for our border security, there are still holes in the funding Congress has passed . . . and what the 9-11 Commission said was the least the Congress should do to combat the terrorist threat.

Let us use the Intelligence Reform bill that became law in December, 2004, as a benchmark of what this nation must do to try and control the security of our borders: the bill mandated 10,000 Border Patrol agents over 5 years (2,000 annually) and 40,000 detention beds over 5 years (8,000 annually).

Here is a compilation of all the funding bills the Congress has passed that have become law--including the bill passed today, laying out how many Border Patrol agents and how many detention beds we have actually funded: Emergency Supplemental in 2005 (Passed May 2005), 500 Border Patrol Agents, 1,950 Detention Beds; FY06 Homeland Security Conference Report (Passed October 2005), 1,000 Border Patrol Agents, 1,800 Detention Beds; Emergency Supplemental in 2006 (Passed June 2006), 1,000 Border Patrol Agents, 4,000 Detention Beds;

Add in what we are passing today:

FY07 Homeland Security Appropriations Bill, 1,500 Border Patrol Agents, 4,870 Detention Beds;

Our grand total of what we should have done according to the 9-11 Commission to date is: 4,000 Border Patrol Agents and 16,000 detention beds. While we are finally caught up on paying for the least the 9-11 Commission said we should do for Border Patrol agents, we are still 1,550 short on detention beds.

Never let it be said that we did the least we could do--this Congress is paying for less than what the 9-11 Commission said was the least we should do. And let me add that it took a national guilt trip and backlash to get this Congress to pay for the least amount of Border Patrol agents the 9-11 Commission demanded.

What has appalled so many of us is that DHS is releasing thousands of illegal immigrants into the general population of the U.S. because they simply do not have the detention space to hold them. These illegal immigrants--also referred to as OTMs (other than Mexicans)--are given what they call ``walking papers'' and are released on their own recognizance with an order to appear at a deportation hearing weeks after their release.

In fact, they are asked where they are traveling to in order to give them a hearing near their final destination. Of course, they rarely return. This is hurting the morale of our U.S. Border Patrol Agents and it is a misguided process.

Because of ``catch and release'' the number of immigrants who have come across our borders has significantly increased. According to the April 2006 Department of Homeland Security Inspector General report here's what underfunding border security means: 774,112 illegal immigrants were apprehended during the past three years. Of those, 280,987--or 36 pecent--were released largely due to a lack of personnel, bed space and funding.

Our willful neglect of our border security had galled our fellow citizens. As a political gesture, this Administration and this Congress want to build a wall and militarize the border? That's not what we need. We need to keep our promises to the American people and fund the promises we made.

We must send a clear message that when you cross our borders illegally, you will be caught and detained. I get our desperate fiscal situation. But compromising border security is not the way to trim the deficit.

At some point, this Congress must deal with the national security risks that remains with the very large number of OTMs released into the general population who are still unaccounted for. Funding the effort to locate all the released OTMs is going to make paying for the minimum number of agents and beds seem like child's play.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the bill. I want to thank Chairman Hunter and Mr. Skelton for their skills and leadership in addressing the military issues before us today.

I want to thank Chairman Hefley for your friendship, for your leadership and for so many years you and I have worked together. I will always remember the good that you have done for this country and for those young men and women who are in harm's way. I know that you are too young to retire, but I wish you the best in whatever you do, and we are going to miss you around here.

This bill provides, in some measure, for the needs of our troops and their families. One of the most important parts of this bill is the attention given to the immediate readiness needs of our men and women in uniform.

The bill takes some action to address the shortfalls in operations, training and maintenance funding that the Department of Defense failed to address in their budget submission.

Now we have taken care of our most immediate readiness need, although we have long-term needs we have not yet begun to address, but I can tell you this is a very, very good beginning.

When we come back to this in the next Congress, again after we recess, we need to particularly address the lack of equipment for the National Guard and for the Reserves. The National Guard and Reserves have been as busy as the active duty military in Iraq and Afghanistan, and they need to be considered equal in status with the other partners in our fighting efforts.

The equipment shortfalls for the National Guard mean we will be unable to respond as we need to do in the next natural disaster, or God forbid, another war.

I thank Chairman Hunter, Chairman Hefley for their outstanding work, but I want to thank my ranking member, Ike Skelton, the top Democrat on the committee whose outstanding leadership has gone a long way to address the many shortfalls in our defense budget, while balancing the need for our military to remain the world's premier fighting force.

So I ask my friends, my colleagues to support this bill. It includes $130 billion in O&M funding to operate the military, $17 billion funding for the military construction, and an additional $20 billion added to the bridge funding to help offset some of the immediate needs of the Army and the Marine Corps.

This is a good bill. I want to thank the staff as well for doing a great job.

Mr. Speaker, each and every Member of this House is equally concerned with bringing terrorists to justice and punishing them for attacking the United States because they have committed horrible crimes.

But I have a lot of questions to ask. I want to be sure that I do the right thing. Why are we rushing into this? I know we have to comply with the law, but we should not be in a hurry. I think we need to do what is right.

You know, I have some questions. When the Geneva Conventions convened back in 1949, there were at least 200 countries who agreed in what came out of this convention. Are we prepared for other nations' leaders, such as Iran, Syria, and others, to selectively interpret the Conventions' article 3 in a way that we are comfortable with?

I am pretty sure that when they met in 1949, there were agreements and disagreements, but we came out with something that everybody accepted. Now there are going to be some changes into that. Have we in any way contacted those leaders of those countries to see what they think about the changes that are being formulated today?

I think that we are beginning to open up a can of worms. So we are going to have to be very careful of what we do. The Navy Judge Advocate General, the top lawyer for the Navy, reminded us recently that Geneva exists to protect American soldiers. Our protections are only as strong as the protections of the Geneva Conventions.

Mr. Speaker, each and every member of this House is equally concerned with bringing terrorists to justice and punishing them for attacking the United States.

Everything about this bill today begs questions.

Do we know what we are doing in putting our feet on an unsure path, one which will certainly change the face of our international responsibilities and our international obligations?

Why are we rushing this? We should not be in such a hurry to overhaul our international obligations.

Nearly 200 nations around the world are signatories to the Geneva Conventions. Are we prepared for other nations' leaders--such as Iran, Syria and others--to selectively interpret the Convention's Article 3 in a way that we are comfortable with?

What can of worms are we opening today?

The Navy Judge Advocate General, the top lawyer for the Navy, reminded us recently that Geneva exists to protect American soldiers. Our protections are only as strong as the protections Geneva offers.

Why are we taking away the Supreme Court's authority--in a historic grab of power--to consult international law in interpreting conduct associated with the War Crimes Act?

Are we taking away power from our other Federal courts?

Do we remember one of the more salient points raised by the 9-11 Commission that the United States was negligent in staying involved in matters around the world?

The 9-11 Commission encouraged the U.S. to get more involved with other nations, to find security in a global environment. Are we doing that today?

My grandson Oscar is almost 4 years old. He may be a soldier someday. While his grandfather is in Congress, I will raise my voice to keep our soldiers safe.

When Congress gives away power to the President, it is a permanent move. The question each of us must ask is: how wise will this policy seem 10 years from now? And when the Congress gives power to the President, we must understand that the President today will not be in office years down the road.

To my friends on the other side of the aisle: do you know the test to apply for this question? It is this: Think of the person you disagree with completely, imagine they are the President, and ask yourself: Do I really want that person to have this authority?

Mr. Speaker, it is deeply offensive for this House to continue on a piecemeal approach to the border security and immigration problem.

The fact is this Congress has not done any heavy lifting to effectively solve our border security crisis.

That's an awful record for the majority party to carry into the election season, so we are forced to deal again with redundant legislation so the majority party can seem to be accomplishing something.

But we aren't accomplishing a single thing.

What we're doing today--in all these bills--is blowing more hot air at voters who are angry that we say we're doing things to improve our border security--but we never pay for them.

Each year since 2001, Democrats have tried to add amendments to defense, homeland security, and emergency supplemental appropriations bills.

Not a single one was passed--if they were, we'd have 6,600 more Border Patrol agents, 14,000 more detention beds, and 2,700 more immigration agents.

On the border, our not funding our promises brings local law enforcement a very large bill--yet another unfunded mandate.

When Border Patrol finds an immigrant lawbreaker--mostly small drug possessions--they take them to the local jail where the local taxpayers foot the bill to hold them.

The same local taxpayers then have to pay for the prosecutors and there aren't enough judges. This is a cycle that won't end.

Now the House Leadership is cutting up legislation we've already passed into many different bills to make it seem like we are working on this issue.

Mr. Speaker, the American people have every right to be angry with this Congress.

Let's use the 9-11 legislation they were embarrassed into passing in December 04 as an example.

Not only did we not fund most of that bill, breaking many of our promises in it we passed virtually the same bill but added extreme provisions to criminalize those here.

In May of 2006, when the Senate passed an astonishingly better bill, the House closed down the process--refused to negotiate a final bill.

Instead, they passed an awful bill last December then spent the summer stalling any negotiation with deceptive ``hearings.''

If the House Republicans were serious about border security, they would have moved forward with a House-Senate conference on border security and actual immigration reform legislation.

Today--in an effort to appear to have accomplished something, anything related to immigration and border security--we are considering the same bill we passed twice already, just chopped into smaller pieces.

This is what it means to fool people.

So, let us remember the old wisdom: you can fool some of the people some of the time, but thank God, you can't fool all the people all the time.

That, I suppose, is the bad news for the crowd that thinks passing the same bills over and over is good politics.

Good politics these days means paying for the Nation's protection and none of these bills take care of that business.

Mr. Speaker, it almost seems that each day that goes by, this Congress stands idly by while we lose more and more of our fundamental rights.

When there is voter fraud--anywhere, anytime election officials must react immediately to right the problem.

And at every turn in this democracy, we must work to increase what is still an anemic voter turnout in the world's leading democracy.

Where's the problem to solve?

The voting problems in recent mid-Atlantic areas were related to the new electronic devices that neither voters--nor poll workers--were familiar with using.

This bill is not about integrity or reducing voter fraud--it is all about depressing the number of voters in U.S. elections by requiring all citizens to show proof of citizenship in order to vote.

This Congress would have voters show both a drivers license and a birth certificate in order to cast a vote.

Where's your birth certificate?

Ask those you know born in this country--do you know how to put your hands on your birth certificate?

Imagine the difficulty for the elderly, students, the disabled, Native Americans and other minorities in finding that document . . . or perhaps that was imagined when this scheme was conceived.

Members of this House should not fear great numbers of voters in elections--we must encourage it.

Hispanics in South Texas will be profoundly impacted by this legislation.

This bill will suppress turnout and intimidate voters--which is a slap in the face of democracy and our Constitution.

Millions of Americans will be denied their right to vote because this Congress is so determined to address a problem that does not really exist.

This bill imposes the 2nd poll tax on voters--through this 2nd unfunded mandate for voting requirements on the states.

Let us not move backwards on this matter.

In my very first election--as Constable in Nueces County, Texas, in 1964--the poll tax was in its final throws . . . but was still the law in Texas.

My mother borrowed against her house to help offset my filing fee . . . and to help my voters pay the poll tax.

Let's not ever see that day again where citizens are taxed in order to vote . . . let's stop putting unfunded mandate on our states . . . and let's seek more ways to increase voting, not suppress it.

We've come too far on civil rights in this Nation to move backwards.

Let us act boldly . . . let us find ways to increase voting in the United States, not suppress it, or tax voters to DE-crease voter turnout.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose the Border Fence bill. It is yet another instance when the leaders in this Congress chose to ignore the real issues facing Americans and consider legislation this Congress has already passed. I opposed the legislation for the border fence when it was before the House earlier this year and I will oppose it again this time.

There is an awful practice this House has consistently gotten into . . . passing bills with great fanfare, then not funding them. That is what we have done with the 9-11 report . . . the Majority was guilted to pass into law the reforms the 9/11 Commission told us would prevent us from another attack. Then we never funded it.

This border fence is a profoundly bad policy because it won't work. Yet it is already included in 2 bills passed by the House this year. This is election year politics at its worst. The $2.2 billion it is estimated this bill would cost could fund almost 2,500 new Border Patrol agents for five years, a 22% increase in the force.

This is not about security. You want security? Then you want comprehensive immigration reform. This President and this Congress brought us to this place . . . where our Border Patrol agents routinely release OTMs (Other than Mexicans) into the U.S. population because we have no room to hold them.

It is in the national security interest of this nation to know who is living inside our borders, and we cannot do that without offering them a path to citizenship so they can come out of the shadows and be part of this economy. That's how you secure this country--not with a fence.

As the founder and co-chair of the Congressional Border Caucus, I have been advocating for adequate border security funding before it was a political issue this year. In particular I have been concerned with the lack of detention space, the need for adequate technology for our United States Border Patrol, the need for more immigration judges, prosecutors and customs agents, and the importance of sanctions on employers illegally employing immigrants.

None of those issues are addressed in the bill before us today. Rather, this bill simply authorizes 700 miles of fencing--again--along the 2,000 mile U.S.-Mexico Border.

The Southern part of my district rests along the U.S-Mexico border and my constituents want real solutions. We have 8-10 million people living in this country that we have absolutely no information on. This is a national security issue. In a post September 11th world, we must comprehensively address immigration and border security. When Congress last addressed immigration reform it was in the late 1980s and they did not do it together--that was a mistake and this Congress is going down that same wrong path.

Border security and immigration enforcement are very serious issues which deserve solemn debate and discussion in Congress. They are not getting them with this controversial political ploy.

Here's a real solution: provide a virtual fence to substantially improve border security and immigration enforcement, as the Reyes- Thompson substitute proposes. Their motion includes provisions to provide the technology, personnel, and equipment needed to monitor and secure every mile of the border 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

I urge the members to vote ``no'' on the border fence, and to support the Reyes-Thompson substitute.