Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, the Justice Department has ordered Miranda rights to be read to terrorists captured on the battlefield. The administration is confusing constitutional rights of arrested criminal defendants in the United States with acts of war by terrorists against the United States in foreign lands.

Miranda rights ordered to be given by the Supreme Court do not apply to a group of people who have a worldwide mission to murder in the name of religion who are captured by our military in Afghanistan.

Never mind, sayeth the administration. Enemy war combatants must be told: ``You have the right to remain silent. You have the right to a lawyer. If you cannot afford a lawyer, we will provide one for you. And anything you say may be used against you.''

This new policy is misguided. Never in history have captured war combatants overseas been treated with such an overflow of privileges. They have been dealt with by our military, especially regarding interrogations.

But now I guess we are changing all that. But that ought not to be. I guess next we will have a whole battalion of lawyers going into the battlefield to tell our troops if and when they can shoot back. Have we gone a bit too far?

And that's just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, I think a little history is in order here, because only Congress can remove a Federal judge. It is part of the checks and balances in our Constitution. It prevents the executive who doesn't like what a judge is doing from taking that person out of office. It prevents other judges in the United States in the judicial branch from removing a judge when they don't like that judge's opinion. That is our duty today, to resolve this issue.

Over my career, I have been somewhat critical of Federal judges, but the reason is because of a philosophical difference sometimes with interpretation of the Constitution and constitutional law.

For the most part, most of our judges, the hundreds that serve all over the United States in the third branch of government, have the utmost integrity and demeanor. In our judicial branch, I would hope we would always have the best legal minds on the bench, not the best legal minds that appear before the bench as attorneys. Unfortunately, that's not universally true, because our Federal judges are underpaid. The lawyers that appear before them, for the most part, make more than the Federal judges. But they serve, not because of money. They serve because of their pride and belief in our Constitution and public service.

Judge Kent is the exception to this rule. We are past the stage of allegations because he made admissions against his own interest in a court of law sufficient to convict him of a felony to the degree it is an abuse of office, abuse of duty, while serving on the bench in a courtroom. That basically is the end of the story. It is a felony. It is a high crime and misdemeanor. He's in prison, and his actions since his conviction show a haughty spirit and a total disregard for his conduct.

Mr. Speaker, in the United States, we don't pay Federal judges to go to the penitentiary. He should be impeached today by this body.

Madam Speaker, the State of Texas lost a warrior this month in the Forward Operating Base Gardez in Afghanistan, a remote and desolate place in the middle of the badlands in this war zone. Army Specialist Jarrett Griemel died on Wednesday, June 9, 2009, from injuries he suffered in Afghanistan. He was just 20 years of age.

This is a photograph right here, Madam Speaker, of Specialist Griemel. Specialist Griemel is the 28th warrior to have died in Iraq or Afghanistan with connections to my Second Congressional District in Texas.

Jarrett was a young man who personified the best qualities of the young people in America today. Born in San Angelo, Texas, and raised in La Porte, Texas, Jarrett was living the life he had always made plans to live, that being a life filled with the achievement and adventure that he desired.

Jarrett was a patriot. He joined the Army his junior year in high school, and he had already completed basic training before graduating with honors from La Porte High School.

He was a member of the swim team and the surf club, and he loved the outdoors and especially the beach and water sports. Jarrett spent his spare time parachuting and cliff diving. Jarrett lived his life to the fullest.

In February of last year, Jarrett married his high school sweetheart, Candice, at a small ceremony in front of a justice of the peace. She joined him in Alaska, where he was deployed by the Army, to begin their young married lives together. Jarrett had a lifetime goal of eventually becoming a surgeon.

Jarrett was an athletic young man with bright red hair and an infectious smile. His brother Chase says he and Jarrett were typical adventurous boys growing up. They spent time in the woods catching snakes and bugs. He wanted to travel, see the world and live a life of excitement and adventure. And Jarrett did just that.

Jarrett was a petroleum supply specialist assigned to the 425th Brigade Special Troops Battalion, 4th Brigade combat Team (Airborne) of the 25th Infantry Division Battalion at Fort Richardson Alaska, home of the Arctic Warriors. The 3,500-soldier brigade is still in the midst of deploying in support of Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan.

Madam Speaker, our American warriors live under the most grueling of conditions in Afghanistan. Jarrett's experience in the outdoors growing up would come in handy in the rugged and cursed terrain.

Having been to Afghanistan myself, I have witnessed how the hot desert sun is unrelenting as our soldiers patrol the dusty, rocky mountains and deserts. The only real relief from the heat is the freezing cold night in the desert, one harsh extreme to another.

Even in the ``desert of the sun and the valley of the gun,'' our troops are not deterred. The elements do not stop the best-trained, best-prepared, most-lethal military in the history of the world. The United States Army is on patrol in the mountains and cursed land of Afghanistan.

Our brave men and women in uniform are unequaled anywhere in the world. They are an all-volunteer force. They are educated, motivated, but they are tenacious. They bleed red, white, and blue. They meet and exceed any task our country sends them to accomplish with great skill and with great pride. They are America's backbone. Our heroes. The best of our Nation. Our amazing examples of the youth of this country.

Jarrett was a proud and accomplished soldier, and at just 20 years of age he was only 1 day from becoming a sergeant when he died in Afghanistan.

Texas is proud to have called him a soldier, a son, and a hero. He will always be remembered by his family, his friends, and a grateful Nation for his service. His love of country, excellence in achievement, and love of his family will be forever engraved on the hearts of every life he touched.

Jarrett's wife, Candice; his mother, Trena Dorsett, and her husband, Donnie, of La Porte, Texas; his father, Michael Griemel; his brothers, Chase, Jason, and Brandon; and his sister, Brianna, are all a living testimony to the memory of this one brave soldier's love of life, love of his country, and love of fellow citizens.

Madam Speaker, it has been said without the brave efforts of all the soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines and their families, this Nation would not stand so boldly, shine so brightly, or live so freely.

Madam Speaker, Jarrett Griemel was one of those soldiers. He was an American soldier, the rare breed who take care of the rest of us, and we will forever be indebted to him, his life, and his service to our Nation.

And that's just the way it is.

Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican Leadership standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information regarding earmarks I received as part of H.R. 2847, Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010.

Requesting Member: Congressman Ted Poe

Bill Number: H.R. 2847, Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010

Account: Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Byrne Discretionary Grants

Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Houston Police Department

Address of Requesting Entity: 1200 Travis Street, Houston, TX 77002

Description of Request: I, and Rep. John Culberson, have secured $350,000 for the

Houston Police Department to be used towards enforcement of illegal possession and distribution of Methamphetamine/ICE, Heroin, Cocaine and Marijuana throughout the Houston region. The Houston Police Department intends to use the funds for classified overtime for Narcotics Personnel, for the purchase of covert equipment, for the purchase of evidence/information, for the purchase of block overtime expenses for general personnel, and for investigative travel. The Targeted Narcotics Enforcement Team (TNET) is an enforcement group whose mission is to carry out investigations addressing the broad spectrum of drug trafficking in and through the Houston region. The goal is to identify, target, and disrupt or dismantle major drug trafficking organizations operating on a regional scale. However, TNET is unique in its efforts by focusing on the full organization. With investigators continuously developing confidential sources (CS) along the Texas-Mexico border, the group is able to target major Drug Trafficking Organizations (DTOs). TNET also works through its coalition of investigators, attorneys, inspectors, and citizen groups to target the dealers and end users that make the DTOs' work profitable. Over the past several years, Mexican DTOs have taken over the production of Methamphetamine and the more crystallized meth known as ``ICE.'' Once dominated by domestic labs, Mexican DTOs now produce the bulk of methamphetamine powder and ICE. These DTOs have utilized the same smuggling routes and techniques that have been used in the past. TNET has quickly adapted to this new threat and has successfully targeted these Methamphetamine DTOs. Additional resources will enhance our ability to combat these sophisticated DTOs.

Requesting Member: Congressman Ted Poe

Bill Number: H.R. 2847, Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010

Account: Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Byrne Discretionary Grants

Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Harris County, TX Constable Precinct #4

Address of Requesting Entity: 16000 Stuebner Airline Road, Suite 520, Spring, TX 77379

Description of Request: I have secured $90,000 in funding to be used to provide a uniform manner of handling violent crimes against woman within this precinct by supporting an investigating deputy for the precinct. This way cases will be worked on 24 hours a day and have a faster completion time. The investigating deputy shall make the scene when a incident is reported and interview all victim(s), suspect(s), and witness(es) while at the scene. Collect all evidence at the scene and provide the victim(s) with a written notification of their `` Victim Rights'' found in the departmental issued Victim Assistance pamphlet. The investigator shall initiate a case report and post the case on the office information board so that all patrol deputies may be informed of the case.

Requesting Member: Congressman Ted Poe

Bill Number: H.R. 2847, Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010

Account: Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Byrne Discretionary Grants

Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Houston Police Department

Address of Requesting Entity: 1200 Travis Street, Houston, TX 77002

Description of Request: I have secured $910,000 for the Houston Police Department to purchase more LiveScan equipment, enabling them to capture electronic fingerprints and be part of the IAFIS (Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System) program which enables them to determine in seconds as opposed to days the alienage and criminal history of those they apprehend through the federal Law Enforcement Support Center. They still need 9 more machines to be fully electronic under IAFIS city wide. Additionally, funding will be used to purchase additional handheld devices that would be given to police officers to quickly capture biometric information of suspects and quickly determine their criminal histories, outstanding warrants, whether they have an order of removal or bench warrant for a failure to appear for an immigration proceeding from Immigration and Customs Enforcement's Office of Detention and Removal's deportable felon database.

Mr. Speaker, when government, without the consent of the people, takes control over independent businesses, it is an oppressive regime. The unelected, unaccountable auto task force gang continues to pick winners and losers in car dealership closings. And they aren't telling why they are closing some dealers and not others. They don't have to. They are the government.

In Houston, Todd and Bob Archer of Archer Chrysler have been ordered by these Supremes to close all three of their Chrysler dealerships. Archer has been in business for over 50 years. This historic motor company has a payroll of $9 million a year and pays annual taxes of $6 million a year.

Now, how does shutting down this business help anyone? Certainly not the 250 workers who now join the over 150,000 summarily fired by the administration. These profitable dealerships are not the reason Chrysler of Detroit is a failed state.

These auto task force bureaucrats need to be given the pink slip. This country is great for two reasons: Personal liberty and economic liberty. We did not become great because of government control over our lives and our businesses. Yet the oppression continues.

And that's just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Madam Speaker, I would like to recognize and thank Kenneth Wayne Hudson for his service in the United States Navy. The hard work and devotion he has demonstrated through out his career serves as an example to us all. Kenny has served our country with courage and honor both at home and abroad.

See Madam Speaker, during the Vietnam War Kenny chose to leave high school before graduating to serve his country. After the war, he began his career and was never able to return to school to obtain his high school diploma. It is with great pleasure that I am today congratulating Kenny on his most deserved accomplishment of receiving his high school diploma from Humble High School. I know all his family and friends are very proud.

Kenny has recently retired from the workforce and I know he will enjoy the company of his wife Becky and three children, Michelle, Chad and Todd.

This great country will forever be in Kenny's debt. I wish him the best of luck in his future endeavors. He will continue to reach new levels of accomplishment.

We appreciate his service to America and his commitment to keeping our nation the ``Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave.''

And that's just the way it is.

Madam Speaker, on rollcall Nos. 349 and 350, I was inadvertently detained. I would have voted ``aye'' on rollcall No. 349 and ``nay'' on rollcall No. 350.

Madam Speaker, with the banner cry, ``they never found a tax they didn't like,'' the taxacrats want to tax energy consumption.

Here's the plan: Tax American energy and use the tax to pay for the national health care program. In fact, Duke Energy has already asked for a 13.5 percent rate increase on its customers to pay for this new oppressive tax. You see, taxes on American energy companies will be passed on to the rest of us. And so it begins.

Families and businesses are already struggling during these new times of change. The stimulus bill has only made things worse. So the government is going to automatically raise the cost of everything that comes from energy, which is almost everything. And the consumer pays, while our small manufacturing companies go out of business because of these new energy taxes. And now we learn the new energy tax plan, which was supposed to save planet Earth, will have little or no effect on the climate. Bummer.

So why punish American energy companies that pass the pain on to citizens? Here's the reason: The government economic philosophy of 2009 is: if something moves, regulate it; if it keeps moving, tax it; and if it stops moving, nationalize it.

And that's just the way it is.

I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I appreciate the gentlewoman from Wisconsin for her representation and hard work on this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, this amendment is a strong amendment, and it puts forth the proposition that victims' issues aren't partisan issues; they're people issues.

I strongly support this amendment to increase Legal Assistance for Victims by $4 million. That doesn't sound like much, but it's a lot of money for victims of crime. It will bring the total Legal Assistance for Victims grants to $41 million. This funding is offset by a $4 million reduction from the Department of Commerce--Departmental Management, Salaries and Expenses account. I think that money would be better served in being given to the Legal Assistance for Victims rather than giving raises and salaries to this department.

These legal assistance grants provide much needed funding for domestic violence victims to seek protective orders, child custody, child support, and housing and public benefits assistance.

As I found during my 30 years as a prosecutor and as a judge, too often, domestic violence and sexual assault victims have to appear in court by themselves, alone. They don't have high-dollar lawyers pleading their cases or guiding them through the complex and often burdensome legal system that we have in all of our States and Federal courts. Instead, even though those who supposedly loved them chose to beat them up, they have to pay the price to fight their way through the legal system to request civil protection. This shouldn't be. We need to match civil justice with our criminal justice system.

The Civil Legal Assistance for Victims program provides funding to meet the legal needs of domestic violence and sexual assault victims. It is the only federally funded program designed to meet all of the legal assistance needs of victims. It is one of the most crucial and lifesaving programs in the Violence Against Women Act; yet it remains critically underfunded. The demand for legal services is so high that the Office on Violence Against Women receives almost 300 applications per year, but that office is only able to fund one-third of the total request.

We have a duty to protect the innocent and to make sure their voices are heard in our court system. We must ensure that victims are not further victimized by their abusers through the legal system in this country.

As founder and co-Chair of the bipartisan Victims' Rights Caucus, I support this amendment. I strongly urge its passage.

Mr. Speaker, ``can you hear me now?''

That phrase repeated by cell phone users across the vast prairies and wide-open spaces of America soon may be taxed by the Feds.

That's right. The taxacrats want to tax citizens for their private cell phone use and for the use of mobile phones at work. It's a benefit, the taxacrats saith. So they want to tax it.

Don't think this new ``talking on the phone tax'' will ever leave. In 1898, Congress passed temporary phone taxes to fund the Spanish- American War, but Teddy Roosevelt and the Rough Riders had the 4-month war won even before the tax took effect. Guess what? Americans are still paying that temporary phone tax for that war 111 years ago.

Phone taxes never die. They don't even fade away. Americans are taxed enough already. Government addiction to spending should be cured cold turkey style. Citizens don't need more silly taxes to fund pet projects. Mr. Speaker, the people are weary of taxes.

``Can you hear them now?'' No more taxes. No ``talking on the phone tax.''

And that's just the way it is.

Madam Speaker, somewhere in the dank dungeons of the Federal Government, the taxacrats are loose, and now they're working on a new tax to tax the middle class out of existence. Death by a thousand taxes. This time, they're talking about taxing health care benefits that folks get from their employers. In other words, if you take care of your family by having health benefits, you're going to be punished for doing so.

I thought the goal was to make sure that everyone had affordable health care. That's what the taxacrats do tell us, but if that's the goal, it doesn't make any sense at all to make health care more expensive by taxing it. Someone is going to have to explain to me how raising taxes on working people is going to make things better for all of us.

The taxacrats are trying to convince people that taxing health insurance won't affect very many people. Well, if that's true, experts say it's not going to be enough money to pay for the government-run health care socialized system we're going to. They also want to mandate coverage. That means that they'll tax anyone who doesn't buy insurance. Taxed if you do. Taxed if you don't. It's enough to make a person sick. That's not a very healthy health care plan.

And that's just the way it is.

Madam Speaker, due to other Congressional business, I unfortunately missed a recorded vote on the House floor on Thursday, June 11, 2009.

I ask that the Record reflect that had I been able to vote that day, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall vote No. 334.

Mr. Speaker, do we really want to nationalize health care and let it be run by the government? Well, here's what's going on in England with their nationalized system. Recently, a British medical ethics expert proclaimed that people who suffer from dementia have a patriotic duty to die. Baroness Warnock, the government medical adviser, says that ``the care dementia requires is very expensive and drains the government resources for health care.'' This government decision-maker says that people will ``soon be licensed to put others down if they are unable to look after themselves.'' She goes on, ``If you're demented, you're wasting people's lives, your family's lives, and you're wasting government resources.''

Mr. Speaker, when the government controls health care, it's expensive, inefficient and ultimately provides poor care. In Britain, it results in the government's rationing of services. The government picks winners and losers in the United Kingdom, and the government picks who lives and who dies. That doesn't seem to be a healthy solution for health care.

And that's just the way it is.

Madam Speaker, the out-of-control violence along our border is made up of more complex elements than most people realize. The criminal cartels controlling our southern border are a lot more powerful than we are led to believe. They are international organized crime cartels that make money off the weaknesses of others. They traffic drugs, money, weapons and human beings across our southern border. They leave death, doom, and destruction in their wake.

Make no mistake about it, there is corruption on both sides of the border that facilitates the lawlessness that is taking place there. Just last month the former sheriff of Starr County, Texas, Rey Guerra, pled guilty to Federal narcotics charges. He admitted to facilitating intelligence that helped Mexican drug traffickers invade the United States and evade counternarcotics efforts. That included trying to find out the identity of confidential informants.

Madam Speaker, he needs to be locked up forever for his betrayal of this country and law enforcement. But he is just one of a growing number of recruits from both sides of the border that are facilitating this avalanche of corruption and anarchy along the southern frontier.

The Mexican criminal cartels have added a layer of intelligence that better resembles foreign recruitment of spies during the Cold War than a traditional criminal enterprise. The huge

amounts of money paid to these officials allow these criminals to traffic people and drugs into our land.

There is a huge difference in the size and scope of these international criminal activities and the typical domestic law enforcement agencies and their duties. As more and more of the violence spills over into Texas and other border States, there is an urgent need to get this lawlessness under control.

The cost of this culture of crime is hammering border States. The FBI is stretched too thin, they don't have the manpower to address this cross-border corruption, and they are fighting domestic Federal crime and jihadists.

Right now we are asking local sheriffs in border States to do double duty, as if they are agents of Interpol. Our domestic police forces should be freed up to do what they do best, fight crime in their counties and their communities.

Our Drug Enforcement Agency is doing a noble effort to control these international criminal cartels that more and more resemble an army at the border than the Cosa Nostra, but the FBI has not been given enough American resources. The Border Patrol is overrun, outmanned, and outgunned.

Our government has limited their rules of engagement. Their standard operating procedure is nonconfrontational. Heavily armed bad guys come through with their contraband of drugs and humans, and yet little is done when they confront our Border Patrol. These cartels are made up of a hybrid of many of the worst elements of organized crime. They include terrorist cells, international espionage agencies, and a foreign military.

But why are we acting as if we can no longer defend our borders and citizens from this lawlessness? It is the philosophy of some that we should wave the white flag of surrender and lessen, not strengthen, our border security. This is absolute nonsense. The Mexican organized criminal cartels are sophisticated, and they are deadly. Maybe it is time to put the United States military on the border. There is no higher duty for the American military than to protect the borders of its own Nation from international criminal invasion.

It is interesting, Madam Speaker. We use our military thousands of miles away to fight the drug war in Afghanistan, but we won't use them at home. Why not? There is no answer from the administration.

We should rotate deployments of our military to the southern border. Our brave men and women are routinely deployed for desert training. Why not concentrate these deployments on the border? This frees up our domestic law enforcement to do the job they should be doing, which is rooting out corruption on our side of the border.

Madam Speaker, I have flown with the National Guard along the Texas- Mexico border. They do a tremendous job working with the Border Patrol and the DEA. But a handful of helicopters is not enough to secure the border. The Air National Guard needs more equipment, more money and more troops to capture the outlaw cartel gangs. The U.S. gave Mexico $1.5 billion to fight the cartels. That money should have been given to our border protectors, not the culture of corruption on the Mexican side of the border.

A lot of attention has been rightly focused on our southern border over the past few years. We have increased the boots on the ground, installed some cameras and erected some barriers and fences and sensors. The efforts have not sealed the border, however.

As the violence gets worse in Mexico, we must get a border strategy in place now before it erupts into a level of widespread violence and more corruption that engulfs our own citizens.

It is not going away, Madam Speaker. The drug cartels are in it for the long haul because of their lust for money. There is a war against drugs going on on the border, even though we are told now that we should not, because of political correctness, use that term.

The first duty of government is to protect the people. The government needs to focus on border protection. Meanwhile, the border war continues.

And that's just the way it is.