Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, in the early morning hours of this past weekend, I accompanied Zapata County Sheriff Sigifredo ``Sigi'' Gonzalez, Jr., his SWAT team and posse of deputies who were patrolling the U.S.-Mexico border in south Texas.

Every day Sigi leads his small 24-member force into the daily battle to protect Zapata County from the invasion of drug lords and human smugglers. Lots of drug money, filthy lucre, as I call it, fund these dangerous drug organizations and human smugglers that lurk across the Rio Grande River. These outlaws have better guns, better

vehicles, better electronic surveillance equipment than the good guys. They even track our peace officers with GPS when they use their cell phones. These drug demons who bring narcotics into the United States make $30,000 a week. Sheriff Gonzalez makes about $40,000 a year.

Sheriff Gonzalez is an unwavering patriot and an outstanding Texas lawman. He is defending America against illegal invaders and fighting the war against vicious, violent drug cartels that threaten our home and our country. He and his dedicated deputies need resources and funding to help fund the war for the border. Our homeland is worth protecting. That is just the way it is.

Madam Speaker, this past weekend I traveled to the United States-Mexico border and spent time patrolling the Rio Grande River with Sheriff Rick Flores and his deputies of Webb County, Texas. Sheriff Flores is a determined lawman. He is fighting invasion of illegal immigration and the war against the dangerous, violent drug cartels that are slithering into the United States.

Flores has only 13 deputies to patrol a county bigger than Delaware. In the tense border towns like Laredo, Rio Bravo and El Cenizo, the war between the drug cartels is waging and getting more dangerous every day. These drug outlaws have more money, extra manpower, better electronic equipment, a better intelligence network, and better firepower than the sheriff and his posse.

The sheriff needs Humvees, body armor, off-road vehicles, satellite phones, GPS systems and much more to fight this battle against drug cartels and human smugglers. Madam Speaker, Sheriff Flores has a passion to protect Texas and all of America. Sheriff Flores put it best when he said protecting our borders is not a partisan issue, it is a red, white, and blue issue. Madam Speaker, that is just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, every day thousands of packages travel throughout the world. United Parcel Service ships and tracks packages from places far and wide, and these packages are kept up with a simple bar code. These packages are scanned at every stop they make when they enter or leave a building, or, when they are loaded on to trucks, ships or planes, they are scanned.

From when a package leaves its destination, let us say in Tegucigalpa, Honduras, until its ends up here in its final destination in Washington, DC, it is scanned at least 10 times and tracked with almost up-to-the-minute data on where it has been and where it is going.

Mr. Speaker, millions of people cross our borders every day. We do not even record who enters our Nation. A border agent at a port of entry in south Texas just looks into the vehicle and may or may not examine papers, and waves the passengers in. We must require the machine-readable bar code passports to enter the United States. It will add no measurable amount of time.

We take the time to record letters and packages; now we must start recording foreign citizens who enter the United States. It is an issue of our national security.

Mr. Speaker, tattoos, lingerie, Ozzie Osbourne concert tickets, gambling, cruises, exotic dance clubs, prostitutes, and new sports cars. Members may ask what this list is. No, it is not Larry Flynt's Christmas wish list. These are examples of purchases made on Federal credit cards by Federal employees for which American taxpayers picked up the bill; they always do.

Today I have introduced the Government Credit Card Sunshine Act. This act is simple. It requires every government credit card bill to be posted on the government Inspector General's Web site within 15 days of its use. It also states that Federal employees whose credit card abuse is more than $500 shall face immediate dismissal, be forced to repay the bill, and sometimes return the items. This serious scandal is stealing and is unacceptable behavior. We are now going to hold Federal employees accountable for ripping off America. So no more abusing the Federal credit card at the taxpayers' expense; otherwise, pack your toothbrush, you are out of here.

Mr. Speaker, as a former judge and prosecutor in Texas, I spent most of my life enforcing the law. I know firsthand the cost of having laws on the books that are not enforced. To make law, whether it is on the State level or the Federal level, and then wink and ignore those who break the law is to live a lie. A government that tolerates law breaking surrenders its integrity, it surrenders its credibility, and it surrenders its self-respect. And right now, Mr. Speaker, America's immigration laws are not working. They are not even enforced.

We must secure the borders and reduce the number of people residing in the Nation illegally. And, of course, amnesty is not the answer to this. Those people here illegally have violated the law, and giving them amnesty is rewarding them for breaking the law. As a judge for 22 years, I never once gave a person amnesty because they got away with breaking the law for a long time. Those who have broken our laws must find themselves penalized, not rewarded, for the disregard for the rule of law.

Mr. Speaker, we have anywhere between 11 and 14 million people here in the United States that are here illegally, and we cannot reward them for breaking the law. Many of them are here because several years ago this country adopted a plan, a plan that has not worked, and that is the plan of amnesty: Tell those people that are here it is okay, you can stay. And now we have encouraged people from all over the world to come to the United States illegally.

Mr. Speaker, I want to make it clear that I am a supporter of immigration, a supporter of legal immigration. I am proud of the fact that my heritage is from Scotland and from Germany. But in this country we have now taken the policy of discriminating against people who want to come here legally to the benefit of lawless illegals. I will give you an example.

In my southeast district in Texas I represent numerous individuals who have come to the United States legally, obtained citizenship, and I recently talked to an individual who was from the nation of Mexico and became a citizen of the United States, and he has been trying to bring the rest of his family to the United States legally. He has a son that he has been trying to bring to this country legally for the last 15 years, Mr. Speaker. And yet because of bureaucracy, red tape, and incompetence, that has not been granted. He wants to do the things the right way, the legal way, and he has discouraged his son from just merely crossing the border illegally like 5,000 people a day do on the southern Texas border, come into the United States illegally by walking across our border.

We have developed a policy that is no policy. We expect our border agents to patrol the vast thousands of miles from Texas to California. And when they actually capture someone coming into the United States, here is what happens, Mr. Speaker: They are arrested, they are taken to a Federal magistrate, they are told that they are going to have a deportation hearing eventually. But the detention facilities are so crowded that over 90 percent of them are released on their word to show up for their deportation hearing 6 months away.

This defies common sense, the idea of this catch and release policy. Capture the people illegally coming into the United States, take them to court, and tell them: If you promise to come back for your deportation hearing, we will have a hearing in 6 months to determine whether you get to stay or you must leave. Are we not surprised that most of them do not come back for their hearings? This defies common sense, it wastes time, and it does not work to solve any problem with our immigration, or, shall I say, our lack of immigration policy.

And just so it is clear, Mr. Speaker, we now know that over 50 percent of the people illegally coming into the United States from the southern borders are not from Mexico. They are from all over the world. They are from China, they are from South America, they are from Europe, but they are not from Mexico. And the reason? Every country in the world knows the United States has open borders, that we do not protect our dignity, we do not protect our sovereignty. So people are coming into the United States illegally, over half of which are from other countries other than Mexico.

I will give you an example. Recently we had an individual arrested by the name of Samir Abdoun from Algeria. He was caught entering California from

Mexico with a French passport. He was released with that summons to appear in court for his deportation hearing, and of course he never showed up for that hearing. He, like many thousands of other people in the same situation, assimilated into the United States.

Three years later, he was arrested on September 22, 2001, when it was learned that he had met for coffee several times with two of the hijackers that took part in the attacks on our country on September 11. Finally, Somar was deported last year.

This catch-and-release policy, where we spend the time to catch those few people that come across illegally and release them on their word to come back to court, simply does not work. We obviously need detention facilities for these people. We obviously need quicker hearings. It should not take 6 months to have a deportation hearing. They should happen within that week.

Then, Mr. Speaker, we have other policies that defy common sense in our immigration lack of policy. One of those is the sanctuary policy where many cities in the United States have taken the position that they will not arrest people in their city that are there illegally. They will not help the Federal Government arrest those individuals. Let me give my colleagues an example.

Many police agencies cannot inquire as to the status, the legal status of an individual that they arrest. One of those cities unfortunately is the City of Houston. In the City of Houston, if a police officer arrests somebody for let us say jaywalking, that individual can be fined for jaywalking, but the police officer cannot inquire as to the legal status of that individual and turn them over to the Federal authorities if they are here illegally in the United States. Why do we enforce the jaywalking laws, why do we enforce the traffic laws around the Capitol with all of the cameras and the red lights, why do we enforce those laws, but yet we do not enforce the basic rule of law protecting the dignity of the United States? And we do not deport those individuals that police officers know are here illegally because they cannot even turn them over to the Federal authorities.

Mr. Speaker, there are ways to beat the United States and the United States system. What I mean by that is a policy apparently perpetrated on this country by the country of Mexico. I have here a pamphlet that is published by the government of Mexico that explains to people who want to come to the United States from Mexico illegally how to come to the United States. Part of this I have blown up on this chart. It explains, this pamphlet explains to Mexican nationals where to cross into Texas so they are not caught, what to do if they are confronted by a border agent, how to deal with coyotes, those are the people for money that illegally bring people into the United States; and where is the best place to cross into the United States. Mr. Speaker, the country of Mexico is exporting its problem and making it our problem, and this is something that ought not to be.

Of course, there are other ways to defy the law, the rule of law. Before a person illegally comes into the United States, before they cross the border, there are flea markets, places where an individual can obtain illegal, forged American Social Security cards, obtain other forged documents such as green cards to come into the United States, and assimilate among the rest of us.

We have to remember, by the way, Mr. Speaker, that Social Security cards are not identification. They serve the purpose of retirement. They do not serve the purpose of identification, but yet that is what it is used for.

The problem continues on the southern Texas border, the other borders that border Mexico, where individuals come across to receive health care, not at their expense, but we pay for it. One way is many individuals come across the border, the individual is pregnant, goes to one of our emergency hospitals, our emergency care is tremendous, and then grants that individual of course permission to come in. A baby is born, that baby becomes a United States citizen, and then the whole family then becomes the problem of the United States. Individuals come here to receive that free health care because we do not turn anybody away. So maybe the United States needs to start sending a bill back to those countries and expecting them to pay for the health care that we pay for that they refuse to pay for in their own country.

We have heard a lot, Mr. Speaker, today on this floor on both sides talking about two important issues that are expensive to Americans. One of those is health care. Oh, we heard on and on and on today about the costs of health care, what we are going to do about it. But one thing we do not want to talk about, Mr. Speaker, is part of the reason health care costs are going up in this country for Americans is because we have people that are receiving health care at the expense of the rest of us. And those are people who are in the United States illegally that go and receive at our hospitals that free health care; free to them, expensive to us. We now know that approximately $2,700 a year each American has to spend for the health care of people who are illegally in the United States. I will repeat that again. It costs each American taxpayer about $2,700 a year of their money to pay for the health care of somebody else that is illegally in the United States. Those Americans, as we heard tonight from that side and this side, may not even have health care benefits. This ought not to be.

Mr. Speaker, we also now know that on the southern border of Texas, that there are reports that individuals who wish to do us harm, we call those people terrorists, are assuming the identities of Hispanic individuals. They are learning Spanish, they sneak into the United States as the downtrodden, illegal immigrants, and they set up cells, networking cells to eventually do us harm. Because, you see, terrorists understand, like everybody else in the world, that we have open borders, that you can sneak into the United States and, once you are here, you can assimilate into the entire population.

So it is a cost factor for Americans, illegal immigration. It is also an illegal issue. But, more importantly, Mr. Speaker, it is an issue regarding homeland security. The next terrorist that does us harm is probably not going to fly into the United States, land over here at Reagan National Airport, and come do us harm. They are probably going to just walk across the border, either the Canadian-American border, or the Mexican-American border. We know that most of the 9/11 hijackers that did us harm, that is exactly what they did. They came across the Canadian border and assimilated into the United States.

Mr. Speaker, as the battle for Iraq races on, the battle for Laredo has begun. I say that because Laredo, Texas, the largest inland port in the United States, is across the Rio Grande River from Nuevo Laredo, a city of 400,000 individuals in Mexico. This weekend I plan on going down to the border of Texas, Laredo, Zapata County, I will be there with a Texas Ranger and some of the local sheriffs and eventually with the border agents to view that situation.

We know what is taking place in the battle for Laredo and Nuevo Laredo. We know this year that 135 people were murdered, 44 Americans were kidnapped in Nuevo Laredo; 7 policemen were murdered. The police chief, the new police chief that was recently made police chief, lasted about 6 hours after he was sworn in, and then he was gunned down with 35 bullets shot into his body. Nuevo Laredo has become a haven for drug traffickers, a haven for gun-running, and a haven for human trafficking into the United States. Because this is an example of where failure to protect the integrity of our borders encourages illegal conduct. That illegal conduct includes those people that wish to make money off the weaknesses of other individuals, and I am talking about those drug dealers. They are bringing that cocaine, that marijuana into the United States from our southern borders. It disseminates throughout the United States. We know that it is a location for gun-running, people who wish to bring firearms illegally into the United States. And we also know that that is where those coyotes, those individuals for money charge other individuals from other nations to come into the United States illegally.

Mr. Speaker, many times we hear from people who think they know about the problem of illegal immigration. Some of those people are, for lack

of a better phrase, those northeastern elites who think they have the answers to all the problems. I would like to invite those people who spend their time out on their yachts near Cape Cod to come down to Texas with me this weekend and go to Laredo and see the problem, the real problem of what illegal immigration does to our country.

The border security is an issue that affects all Americans. I have discussed with many of the property owners that live along our Texas border how illegal immigration affects it. One rancher in Zapata County told me that it was like Sherman's march to the sea, that Union general who invaded the South and burned everything in his path. He said, that is what it is like. They are coming onto my land, destroying all the land, all the property, stealing everything they can get their hands on, because this is the path into the United States.

Property rights are something that maybe we ought to talk more about, how our Federal Government has the responsibility to protect the dignity of property rights of all Americans. Recently, we had an individual by the name of Luis Posada Carriles, he was a Cuban anti- Castro militant who was taken into custody in my home State of Texas for immigrant violations. He is wanted in Venezuela for allegedly blowing up a Cuban plane and killing 70 people on that airplane. This alleged terrorist told American authorities he easily crossed the U.S.- Mexican border in the car of a smuggler, hopped the bus to Miami, and even evaded arrest by U.S. immigration agents by claiming he was a forgetful old man and lost his identification. This is typical, this is scary. It is also proof, Mr. Speaker, how easily it is for a terrorist with plans to harm others can get into the United States. This is a serious matter of homeland security, and it must be fixed.

Our borders are out of control, and securing our borders is the first step in any serious immigration reform policy. So what are we going to do? Well, just today, I have introduced a bill called the Passport Security bill. It is a simple bill that requires all persons entering the United States that try to come here legally to have a passport.

Mr. Speaker, if you come to the United States and you are from Canada or from Mexico or from one of the Caribbean islands, you do not have to have a passport to get in. You can use any type of document that is acceptable; everything from a birth certificate to a baptismal certificate. Some of our border agents have to be so versed in up to 500 documents from foreign countries before they can let a person come into the United States. It makes it very easy to forge those documents, to come in here illegally when you are trying and pretending to come in here in a legal manner.

So all nations in the world basically require passports to enter their country. We do not do so, with the exceptions that I mentioned. So it is time for us to require a passport. A passport does not discriminate. It is the same document used for every individual. I have talked to numerous individuals who are concerned about border security, and they tell me, let us go to passports. Passports do not discriminate. It has a bar code that is in a passport, and it is a universal form of entry into any country. It even could be used by our businesses who have to now become policemen to determine whether or not the person coming into their business that wants a job is here legally, and they check the Social Security card, they try to check their birth certificates, all the documents they have; they do not have to check any of that any more. All they have to have is a passport. If they enter the United States legally, they will have that passport when they go and seek employment as a person trying to legally come into the United States. A passport is the gold standard for entry into all countries, and it is time that we require passports.

Mr. Speaker, the 9/11 Commission, in its extensive report, stated that passports are necessary for entry into the United States. But here we are, we still do not have passport requirements. Why is that? It is because of bureaucracy at the Federal level that does not implement the 9/11 Commission's report. So that is why I have filed this bill, to require a person to show a passport when coming into the United States.

In some cases, Mr. Speaker, people who wish to come into the United States, for example, from Canada, do not even have to show documentation. All they have to do is profess that they are a citizen of that nation. The same is true of Americans who wish to reenter the United States. For example, one of my staff members recently went to Mexico over the August recess, and when she entered Mexico, she was waved through. She was not even asked for identification.

But more importantly, when she reentered the United States, the border agent simply looked into the vehicle which had several passengers and asked, Well, are all of you all American citizens?

Someone replied yes and they were passed into the United States without any search, without any identification. So our borders at border crossings must be protected, and the border between border crossings must be protected. It is a homeland security issue.

Some people have discussed the issue of having a fence to protect the southern border. That is at least worthy of debate on this House floor. If we are going to get serious about protecting our borders, we should at least discuss the issue.

Earlier I mentioned one of the costs that is imposed upon Americans for illegal immigration, and that is health care. Some say that health care costs in the United States, 20 percent of health care costs are because people are in the system, illegally in the United States.

Now, let us go to the second topic most talked about on this House floor regarding costs, and that is education. Almost every day on this House floor we hear the talk about, oh, the expense of education in the United States. And it is expensive. It is expensive when your kids are in public school all the way through high school.

And you want to talk about expensive, wait until they try to go to college and see how expensive it is. I have four kids in college, and one of them is still in college. It is expensive, education is in the United States.

But all of the talk that we hear about the cost of education, no one wants to talk about the fact that there are people in the system getting an education and Americans are paying for it, once again the people who are illegally in the United States.

Some experts say it is up to 22 percent of education costs re because people are in the system that are benefiting from it, but not paying for it. You know, we have a policy in this country. If you are here, however you got here, legally or illegally, you are going to get an education at the expense of the rest of us. And not only that, you are going to be educated in your own language.

Now, think about that. If we went to a foreign country like France illegally, sneaked into the country, would we have the nerve to go to one of their public schools and demand to be educated not only for free, but in our own language? Of course not. That is absurd.

But yet we do this in our country because it is the policy of this country. Regardless of whether it should be or should not be, it is costing Americans; and Americans have to pay for this expensive education for those who are in the system and do not contribute to it.

Let me give you some examples of that that go to higher education. Let us say a person from Texas wants to go to Kansas to school. Well, Kansas charges that Texas student out-of-state tuition. Why? Because they are not from Kansas. Well, that is all right. Most States have that law.

Let us say a person from a foreign country legally comes to the United States, legally wants to go to Kansas and get an education. And they are admitted on an education visa. They go to Kansas. They pay out-of-state tuition because they are not from Kansas. Makes sense.

But take the third example of a person illegally in the United States in Kansas. They get admitted, first of all, to one of their universities and they pay in-state tuition. That ought not to be. We discriminate against American students. We discriminate against people legally coming into the United States to get an education, to the benefit of people who are illegally here;

and in some States people illegally in the state that go to colleges get admitted into colleges, receive State grants. Maybe those grants ought to go to American citizens.

And now with the competition of higher education so stiff, in some cases Americans are denied entry into a university to the benefit of someone who is admitted because they are illegally in the United States. Once again, this defies common sense. So the two examples, health care costs, education costs. Part of the reason is because there are people here who have benefited from it and not contributed to it.

And the third example that I would like to use is the cost of the criminal justice system. I was a judge for 22 years in Houston, Texas. Heard about 25,000 felony cases, that is serious crime, everything from stealing to killing.

About 20 percent of the people that I saw were in the United States illegally now. Think about that. First of all, they are here illegally. They commit another crime. When convicted, they are sent off to one of our State penitentiaries. Of course, Americans pay for that system. Americans pay for the criminal justice system. We pay for their incarceration. Then when the person serves their time for whatever, robbery or murder, you would think that the law in this country would say that person illegally in the United States that commits a felony and goes to the penitentiary, we would deport them back where they came from.

But that is not what we do. We bring them right back to the county in which they were convicted, and we release them. Why do we do that? Because there is no cooperation by law with the State authorities and Federal authorities on people illegally in the United States and whether they should be deported after they have served their criminal sentence.

So that costs us as well. And some likewise estimate is 18 to 19 percent of our criminal justice costs are because we have people in the United States illegally here committing crimes and having to serve their time. And we pay for that. So these are some examples of issues that the American public has to deal with and deal with immediately.

It is necessary that we as a people come to grips with the issue of illegal immigration and decide what position we are going to take, whether we are going to take a stand for the rule of law or whether we are going to ignore the law.

It would seem to me that the first duty of government is to protect the sovereignty of the Nation, protect the identity of the borders of our Nation. It just seems to me that is what most countries do.

But we have chosen not to do that, for whatever reason. I do not know the reason. But now the time has come for us to enforce the rule of law, enforce border security. It is the right thing to do. It is not the right thing to do to tell people who come here illegally, that is okay. That is the wrong thing to do.

Mr. Speaker, it is a national security issue. We know that there are terrorists among us. We know they wish to do us harm. Why do we encourage that conduct by having no national policy that enforces the rule of law on our borders? Everybody wants to come to the United States. I do not blame them for that.

I mean, everybody wants to come here, but everybody cannot come to the United States. Everybody cannot live in the United States. So what are we going to do about that? Well, let us have a policy. Let us have a plan. Let us have a plan that works. Let us have a plan that encourages people to come here legally so it does not take 15 years to come into the United States legally as in the example I mentioned to you.

And let us have also a plan that enforces the rule of law and does not encourage illegal conduct, but tells people if you want to come to the United States, do it the right way, do it the legal way or stay home.

You know, we all took oaths as public officials to uphold the Constitution, to protect this country from all enemies, foreign and domestic. And I think part of our obligation is to enforce the rule of law and the sovereignty of the United States.

We call this place the land of the free and the home of the brave, and rightfully so. This very day, we have some of our bravest Americans halfway across the world protecting another country called Iraq. It is important that we in this country care more about Americans than we do about people who are illegally from foreign countries who come into the United States.

So the line is drawn in the sand, Mr. Speaker. And as I mentioned, the battle for Laredo has begun. The battle for our sovereignty is upon us. We will either protect our country or we will not. We will either surrender or we will refuse to surrender. And we cannot surrender our borders to those people who invade our country illegally. It is an invasion. It is a colonization of the United States, and it is illegally being done right under our eyes.

That is just the way it is, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 4 o'clock and 40 minutes p.m.), under its previous order, the House adjourned until Monday, October 24, 2005, at noon.

Mr. Speaker, during the second week of December, the 2005 White House Conference on Aging will take place in Washington, D.C. This is a once in a decade event where delegates from across the United States gather to make policy recommendations to the President and Congress on issues of importance to aging generations.

I had the privilege of nominating Betty Lee Streckfuss, RN, as a delegate to the 2005 White House Conference on Aging, and I am proud to say that she will be in attendance as the delegate from the Second Congressional District of Texas.

Betty has a long and distinguished background in healthcare. A former Head Nurse of the Acute Care Pediatric Unit at Ben Taub Hospital in Houston, TX, Betty is currently serving as founder and associate partner of Streckfuss and Associates, a Texas based medical consulting endeavor specializing in clinical policies, procedures and regulatory issues. She is also secretary of the Houston/Harris County Area Agency on Aging Advisory Council and a member of the Texas Silver Haired Legislature.

I commend Betty's commitment to healthcare. I have no doubt that her experience, insight, and sincere desire to advocate on behalf of our aging Americans will serve our community well at the 2005 White House Conference on Aging.

Madam Speaker, people die because of domestic violence: Rocio Alvarado, 27, Houston. Ella Marie Broussard, 26, Houston. Ericka Cavazos, 28, Houston. Marivell Garcia, 22, Baytown. Ebony Johnson, 22, Houston. Keisha Joseph, 34, Houston. Florentina Matamoros, 31, Houston. Maria Navarro, 37, Houston. Gloria Ann Ozuna, 18, Houston. Ziba Poursheykhi, 44, Houston. Susan Soogrim, 44, Baytown. Amanda Terlouw, 25, Houston. Prudencia Vallejo, 62, Houston. Khadija Williams, 31, Humble. Sheila Marie Davis, 35, Beaumont. Joyce Volrie, 62, Beaumont.

Madam Speaker, these victims were murdered by their intimate partner, spouse, or boyfriend this very year. Domestic violence is not just a family issue but a criminal issue, a health issue, an American issue. Madam Speaker, America must be concerned about what takes place in our families and the murder of spouses in the domestic violence situation. That is just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, this year in January, I had the honor to go to Iraq for their first elections in history for a democracy. Iraq is where the world began, between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers. Myself and Congressman Chris Shays of Connecticut were the two Members of Congress that were in Iraq on election day.

You remember, Mr. Speaker, those were the times when the skeptics and the terrorists said, Oh, there won't be an election. The Iraqis won't do it. They won't go and vote. Yet they did. Sixty-one percent of those people went and voted.

While there, I learned a lot from the Iraqis. I learned, first of all, they are a very proud people, that they are somewhat underestimated about their ability to have and believe in a democracy. I also learned that those people are just like us and all people in the world, because, Mr. Speaker, down in our soul, where we are made, every person has the yearning to be free. The Iraqis are no different than Americans or other peoples in the world.

I also learned, Mr. Speaker, that they will not be intimidated by the terrorists. The terrorists in January told the Iraqis that if they go and vote, they will be killed. They were told that if they were seen with that purple finger, they would be killed. Yet the Iraqis voted. They willingly stuck their finger in that inkwell and stained their finger for several days. I remember here on the House floor where many of us stood when the President of the United States in his State of the Union message talked about those Iraqi people and how we stood defiant as well as those people with our finger in the air, showing that freedom will prevail and rule the day.

Mr. Speaker, this has been an interesting year for the Iraqi people. They started a country in January with their Parliament. They then elected a Prime Minister, a President. They wrote a constitution, they voted on it, and they have all done it in less than 10 months. Remarkable. We sometimes forget history. We forget our own history that it took us 13 years after 1776 to get our Constitution. In fact, only nine States ratified it at first, and the two big ones, New York and Virginia, were late comers to the table. In fact, North Carolina did not ratify it until the next year and Rhode Island took 2 more years to ratify the U.S. Constitution. Not all Americans supported the Constitution. One of my favorite Revolutionary War people, Patrick Henry, did not believe that the new Constitution should be ratified. He believed in a stronger State instead of a Federal Government.

We sometimes forget our own history and we sometimes sell the Iraqi people short as many people have done this year. Those people, the Northeast elites and the west coast Hollywood leftists, said it would not happen, that the Iraqis would not have a government this year. But they did. Maybe those folks seem to be somewhat disappointed that the Sunnis, the Kurds and the Shiites all came to the table and voted for this Constitution. Those Northeast elites and those west coast Hollywood leftists were the same ones who said that we couldn't help Germany and Japan in World War II. We fought those two countries, those two regimes of totalitarian states, but the United States went in and set up democracies in both of those countries. Now those countries are not only free but they are world powers and they are our allies.

And what if it happens? What if Iraq and Afghanistan do the same thing that Germany and Japan did, become world powers, become democracies and, more importantly, become free and our allies?

Mr. Speaker, democracy is the enemy of terrorism and freedom is the enemy of anarchy, and the people are the enemy of dictators. The United States in its history has gone to war numerous times, but we go to war not to conquer but to liberate. We go to war not to enslave but to set free. And so our troops that I met with in January and the troops that are serving there today are serving a purpose in Iraq. I have talked to them and they are proud that they are able to represent the United States and fight the war on terror. But they are also proud of the fact that they are setting up a democracy in that land far, far away.

Mr. Speaker, history will look favorably on our role in Iraq and Afghanistan. History will record what amazing people these Americans were. It will be a good time in history for the United States and the Iraqi people.

Mr. Speaker, freedom once again has ruled the day.

Mr. Speaker, when the relentless rain and howling winds of Hurricane Rita hit southeast Texas, the agriculture industry took a beating. Texas rice farmers were already having a tough year because of unpredictable weather, increased fuel and fertilizer costs, and the last thing they needed was a visit from the lady of the gulf. Rita's wrath ravaged rice fields and caused power outages in the mills where harvested rice was being dried. The crops in the field just weeks away from the second harvest took a beating.

Bill Dishman, Jr., a rice farmer in my district, owns a farm in the small town of China, Texas. He figures about one-fourth or more of his second crop, that is the one rice farmers count on to make a profit, was lost. Almost every southeast Texas rice farmer suffered damages from this storm.

Following the storm, I had the opportunity to travel to southeast Texas with Secretary of Agriculture Mike Johanns and assess the damage and speak to the local rice farmers. Their concerns were serious and their outlook was grim. Texas rice farmers like Bill Dishman and Ray Stoesser need to remain on their combines and the rice needs to grow more, and we need more markets like Cuba. These are tense and troubling times. The American rice farmer, Mr. Speaker, is becoming an endangered species.

Mr. Speaker, down in the depths of the warm waters of the Gulf of Mexico lies some old Spanish galleon with unrecovered gold, but there is another type of gold in the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico, black gold. We call it crude oil. There is also white gold there as well. We call it natural gas.

These natural gold reserves are energy for today's Americans and we need to drill for these gold reserves. According to the Department of Energy, families across the United States will experience winter heating bills that will be up to 50 percent higher for those who heat with natural gas. This alarming data is yet another reason for us to open up the Outer Continental Shelf and begin drilling for more natural gas and oil off our own coastlines.

The so-called global warming will not keep Americans warm this winter. We have got to become more self-sufficient when it comes to energy, natural gas and crude oil. It borders on the absurd to continue to be held hostage by foreign countries and foreign oil and ignore the billions of barrels that have yet to be drilled off the United States coastline.

Mr. Speaker, I have introduced H.R. 3811 to help relieve our energy woes and help stop U.S. dependence on foreign oil. This legislation will allow for safe oil and natural gas exploration along the Outer Continental Shelf. This bill would do away with all the moratoriums and executive orders that limit leasing activities while maintaining environmental.

Right now 90 percent of our coastline is off limits to drilling because the Federal Government prohibits it. In this chart, Mr. Speaker, I show the three places off the coast of Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi where we drill. All the red here, these are sacred places where we cannot drill for oil. Maybe Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi ought to join OPEC.

In any event, Mr. Speaker, we have got to drill off these other areas because there is oil and there is natural gas in these areas off our Outer Continental Shelf.

It is a myth, Mr. Speaker, that we cannot drill offshore safely. The best experts in the world are from the United States and they know how to drill safely. It is a myth perpetrated on the American people by environmental extremists. No one wants polluted waters. I certainly do not, but we can have both safe drilling and environmentally correct drilling as well.

Let us look at some of the facts, Mr. Speaker. This chart shows pollution from oil, crude oil. Most of the pollution that is in our oceans comes from nature itself, from seepage on the bottom of the ocean. About 63 percent comes from nature; 32 percent comes from jet skis and oil runoff from American soil; 3 percent comes from those tankers that are bringing crude oil in from the Middle East; and way down here 2 percent of the pollution of crude oil comes from offshore drilling. It is a myth to think that we cannot drill offshore in a correct, an environmentally correct way.

The National Academy For Sciences has furnished this information. The American public needs to know the truth about offshore drilling. If coastlines like Florida are worried about the environmental threats, maybe they should stop people from using jet skis and boating because more than a quarter of the spills come from just that. But maybe we should do some research.

According to the Department of Interior, since 1985 more than 7 billion barrels of oil were produced in Federal offshore waters, with less than .001 percent spilled. That is a 99.99 percent record for clean operations. My Jeep leaks more oil than this.

Katrina and Rita hit the coastline very hard, Mr. Speaker. There were high winds, billions of dollars in damages, refineries were closed, but we did not hear anything about oil spills from offshore rigs that were damaged. Why? Because it cannot occur. Even those violent ladies of the gulf could not get a good oil spill to happen.

People in these coastal States want cheap gasoline. They want natural gas, but they say do not drill off our coastlines. Mr. Speaker, this is hypocritical and it violates common sense. Plus, leasing these reserves will bring money to the United States Treasury and to State governments.

If Americans expect to continue driving and heating their homes at low prices, we must begin safe drilling in other places besides the gulf. Economies on the coast rely heavily on tourism and they voice concerns about the so-called environmental impact. Mr. Speaker, if fuel costs continue to rise, the planes and automobiles will be used less and these tourists will never show up at these coastal places. It seems like the consequences of higher gas prices could have a worse impact than an innocent oil rig that is 100 miles off the coast.

Around the world nearly every other major country with oil and gas reserves is promoting investment and developing their offshore capacity. They

even drill in the North Sea, the roughest waters in the world, and they do so safely.

Mr. Speaker, we need to continue to explore the Outer Continental Shelf or we will suffer the consequences. Someone has said we will freeze in the dark and end up riding bicycles if we do not use common sense. Mr. Speaker, that is just the way it is.

National Ocean Industries Association

Basic Facts About Offshore Oil and Natural Gas

U.S. offshore energy production is an essential component

of the nation's energy and economic security. U.S. offshore

development accounts for more than 25 percent of the

country's natural gas and more than 30 percent of its oil.

Each year, offshore energy development contributes between $4

and 6 billion in revenues to the federal Treasury. Millions

are also paid to states and local communities. The federal

offshore produces approximately 600 million barrels of oil

and about 4.5 trillion cubic feet of natural gas annually.

The U.S. offshore industry leads the world in developing

and commercializing advanced technologies that protect

sensitive environments and improve the quality of life for

all Americans. The U.S. offshore energy industry operates in

accordance with the world's most stringent standards for

human safety and environmental protection.

Since 1985, more than 7 billion barrels of oil were

produced in federal offshore waters with less than 0.001

percent spilled--a 99.999 percent record for clean

operations. Government statistics show that the injury and

illness rate for offshore workers is about 70 percent lower

than for all of private industry. Thirty percent of the 15

million fish caught by recreational fishermen annually off

the coasts of Texas and Louisiana are caught near platforms.

Conservative estimates show annual catches of approximately

450,000 pounds of reef fish annually, valued at approximately

$2 million.

national benefits

Producing America's Energy

The submerged lands of the outer continental shelf (OCS) of

the United States have proved to be one of the most bountiful

sources of offshore oil and natural gas in the world. On a

per-day basis, the OCS currently produces about 13.9 billion

cubic feet of natural gas and about 1.3 million barrels of

oil. The federally managed OCS provides the bulk--about 89

percent--of all U.S. offshore production. Five coastal

states--Alaska, Alabama, California, Louisiana and Texas--

make up the remaining 11 percent.

Offshore Energy Revenues Enrich the Nation

Between 1953 and 2002, the offshore energy industry has

contributed more than $145 billion to federal revenues. Most

of these revenues were derived from royalty payments that are

assessed on oil and natural gas produced from federal lands--

typically one-eighth or one-sixth of oil and natural gas'

market value. Royalties, rents and bonus payments are

collected by the Minerals Management Service (MMS)--which

often results in that agency serving as the second largest

collector of federal revenues after the Internal Revenue

Service.

Although most the revenues derived from offshore energy

activity are deposited directly into the federal Treasury,

these revenues are also the source of funds for the Land and

Water Conservation Fund and the National Historic

Preservation Fund. State and federal agencies use the Land

and Water Conservation Fund Act to buy parks and recreation

areas. Annually nearly $1 billion dollars in OCS revenues

flow to this program.

Likewise, the National Trust for Historic Preservation has

received more than $2.5 billion in offshore energy proceeds

to help preserve historic legacies since 1982. Like the Land

and Water Conservation Fund, money from the National Historic

Preservation Fund is distributed to states whether or not

they have any offshore leasing or production seaward of their

coasts.

Coastal states in producing areas also have a direct claim

on OCS revenues under Section 8(g) of the Outer Continental

Shelf Lands Act. For leases on the submerged lands lying

outside the 3-mile state zone and as far as 10 miles

offshore, 27 percent of the royalty, rent and bonus revenues

are paid directly to the adjacent states.

States have used these funds for a variety of programs.

Alabama established the ``Forever Wild Program'' with

offshore leasing and production money to acquire, maintain,

and protect unique habitats. Mississippi has a similar ``Gulf

and Wildlife Protection Fund'' and Louisiana uses its money

for education.

Employment

The Gulf coast of Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama

is the birthplace of offshore prospecting for oil and natural

gas, and the economic benefits of that development continues

to accrue to that region to the present day. There are more

than 85,000 jobs that are directly related to the industry,

and an equal number of workers employed in supporting jobs

indirectly related to OCS activity.

The average salary and benefits for workers of producing

companies employed as a direct result of activity in the Gulf

of Mexico was estimated to be $52,580 in 1992. (The last year

for which statistics are available.) Since then, a shortage

of skilled labor due to the recent boom in industry activity

has pushed earnings even higher. In addition to payroll

expenditures, producers pay several billion dollars each year

to vendors and contractors who support OCS activities.

Safety and Environmental Performance

The National Academy of Science's National Research Council

recently released the results of a comprehensive study

entitled, Oil in the Sea III: Inputs, Fates, and Effects. The

report finds that although the amount of oil produced and

transported on the sea continues to rise, improved production

technology and safety training of personnel have

significantly reduced both blowouts and daily operational

spills. In fact, the report states, today, accidental spills

from platforms represent only 2 percent of petroleum inputs

in U.S. waters and about 4 percent worldwide. Furthermore,

the MMS has found that most spills are quite small--with the

median being three barrels or less. Between 1971 and 2000, 41

percent of all spills were less than three barrels in size,

81 percent were less than 10 barrels, and 96 percent were

less than 100 barrels.

The industry remains under intense scrutiny by its two

primary regulators--the MMS and the U.S. Coast Guard--as well

as a host of other governmental agencies with oversight

responsibilities such as the Environmental Protection Agency

and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

However, it is the MMS that regulates all exploration,

development, and production activities on about 8,000 active

leases to ensure that these activities are conducted safely

and in an environmentally sound manner. The MMS reviews and

approves industry exploration and development plans before

allowing any operations to commence, monitors all lease

operations to ensure that industry is in compliance with

relevant requirements, and conducts scheduled and unscheduled

inspections. In 1997, MMS conducted over 12,000 inspections

of OCS facilities.

Innovation Boosts U.S. Energy

The Deepwater

Between 1996 and 1999, technological advances coupled with

economic incentives passed by Congress under the 1995

Deepwater Royalty Relief Act, encouraged energy companies to

acquire more than 2,600 leases in waters 800 meters or

greater pushing the total number of leases in the Gulf of

Mexico to more than 7,000.

The number of deepwater exploratory wells drilled more than

doubled from 1996 to 1998, despite the limited number of rigs

that can work at such water depths and the decline in crude

oil prices during this time period. During that same period,

production from deepwater wells jumped 50 million barrels,

bringing total Gulf of Mexico deepwater oil production to

more than 570 million barrels in 2001--nearly a 535 percent

increase from 1995. By 2002, deepwater activity contributed

959,000 barrels of oil and 3.6 billion cubic feet of natural

gas per day to U.S. energy supplies--approximately 61 percent

of the Gulf's total production.

Innovative technological leaps have enabled this thrust

into ever-deeper waters. Floating drilling rigs and

production platforms are now able to maintain position over

top of a well thousands of feet below without the need to

moor a fixed structure to the ground. Dynamic positioning

systems using computer-controlled directional propellers

compensate for wind, wave or current to keep the vessel

stationary relative to the seabed, while innovative hull

designs maintain stability even in ``hundred-year'' storms.

As a result, drilling is now taking place in waters more than

10,000 feet deep, an accomplishment that would have been

unimaginable just 20 years ago. Since 2001, industry has

announced 11 major discoveries in waters exceeding 7,000

feet.

The Deep Shelf

Trapped more than 15,000 feet within the earth's crust, so-

called ``deep natural gas'' represents a tremendous untapped

domestic energy resource. Government studies estimate that

there could be more than 20 trillion cubic feet of untapped

deep natural gas deposits in the Gulf of Mexico--about as

much as is currently being produced from all areas in North

America on an annual basis!

Annual gas production from Federal waters of the Gulf of

Mexico has exceeded additions to proved gas reserves every

year since 1984, causing a decreasing trend in remaining

proved gas reserves. New discoveries of deep gas on the OCS

offer the best short-term opportunity for achieving the

large reserve additions and necessary high flow rates to

offset declining gas production, which has been falling

since 1997. Recent deep gas discoveries on the OCS have

shown these new completions can produce as much 20 to 80

million cubic feet per day.

Unfortunately, despite significant advances in deep gas

technology, these prospects remain very challenging to find

and develop successfully. Since 2001, Gulf natural gas

production has decreased from 5,128 BCF to 4,175 BCF in 2003.

Deep gas discoveries may help reverse this trend however:

deep gas production increased from a relatively low 284

billion cubic feet in 2000 to 421 billion cubic feet in 2002.

New Life for the ``Dead Sea''

As recently as the late 1980s, many experts agreed that oil

reservoirs in the Gulf were drying up. With oil and natural

gas output slackening, some dubbed the Gulf of Mexico

the ``Dead Sea''. However, leading edge technologies breathed

new life into the Gulf--technologies that have enabled more

efficient exploration in deeper waters and production from

the deepest recesses of the earth's crust. Now the Gulf is

widely recognized to be among the most promising areas in the

world and oil production levels have increased sharply every

year since 1996.

Leading edge offshore technology helps the country to find

and produce the energy to heat our homes, fuel our cars, run

our computers and drive the economy in faster, safer, cleaner

and more efficient ways than ever thought possible. These

innovations began with the natural gas and oil industry but

they enrich the lives of all Americans. As the leading

technological laboratory in the oil industry, the Gulf's

transformation provides an interesting snapshot of the

advances that have reverberated around the world and helped

to keep energy abundant, affordable and clean.

Mr. Speaker, out on the hot, windy, arid plains of West Texas, where the prairie dog and the coyote make their home, amidst the tumble weeds, is a school that is the oasis of private Christian education and excellence. Celebrating its 100th year, Abilene Christian University, with its over 4000 students and 200 faculty members, has progressed dramatically since its beginning in 1906 as Childress Classical Institute.

Mr. Speaker, once again democracy has trumped anarchy, chaos, and terror. The Iraqis, 61 percent mind you, went out and voted for a new constitution. The Kurds, the Sunnis, and Shiites have formed a new democracy in Iraq. Those cynics, even those in this House who say the Iraqis are not competent to have a republic, have once again been proven to be the ignorant.

I was in Iraq this January and witnessed these proud people yearning to be free. The United States presence in Iraq is serving two purposes: we are fighting and winning the war on terror, and we have helped to establish a democracy, a free nation in that land far, far away.

Even though there are those who have the French mindset and want us to cut and run, we will not do so. We will not run from duty and democracy. When our noble cause is completed and the terrorists are on the run, and when the Iraqis can protect their own nation, our troops will return to these shores.

To those pacifists that cry, Peace, peace, at any price peace, there can be no peace as long as there is some American somewhere dying for the rest of us. That is just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, Azerbaijan is an important strategic ally for the United States. The Country is located in a region that can produce and transport energy products to the West. As well as provide military and intelligence capabilities to the United States.

Azerbaijan is an emerging major non-OPEC oil producer and transit country (i.e, Baku-Ceyhan pipeline), which will supply 1.6 million barrels a day after being operational December 2005. This will stabilize the other energy producing countries (oil and gas) in the region and their ability to get their product to the marketplace without the dependency of Russia or Iran.

Azerbaijan is a front line positioned state for military and intelligence access to Iran. This will act as a stabilizing effect for the region and fight off the aggressive position of Iran. It will also work against terrorist activities spread by fundamental terrorist who have the support of Iran.

Azerbaijan is the first Muslim state to provide troops to the U.S. backed coalitions in Iraq., Afghanistan and Kosovo. To date, they are the only Shiite Muslim state to provide troops.

Azerbaijan is in the vanguard of the emerging democracies from the former Soviet Union. Azerbaijan has parliamentary elections scheduled November 6, 2005, and is moving forward with international support to assure free and fair elections. Azerbaijan has allowed opposition parties the right to organize, protest, and access public television.

Azerbaijan maintains excellent relations with the State of Israel, both, diplomatically and economically including providing crude oil.

Azerbaijan is a strong strategic partner with the United States and is cooperating in United States activities regarding Caspian regional security overseeing Iran (e.g., Caspian Guards program, radar system, fly-over rights and re-fueling capacity).

Azerbaijan is a strategic asset given its presence as a strong United States-Israel ally next to Iran. Azerbaijan welcomes trade with Israel and stronger ties between the two countries.

Iran has threatened Azerbaijan due to cooperation with Israel and the United States Iran continues to inform Azerbaijan that their strong relations with the United States and Israel will not be beneficial, as Iran is their neighbor.

The Iran military enters Azerbaijan airspace weekly and Iran has made claims on Azerbaijan's offshore oil and gas exploration.

Iran has attempted to spread Madrassas schools in Azerbaijan and Azerbaijan has resisted.

Iran pressures Azerbaijan to abolish visas between the two countries, which would lead to less control and more Iranians infiltration into Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan is resisting this effort.

Occupied Azerbaijan (NK Region) is on the Iranian border, where alleged terrorist camps, narcotic trafficking and weapons trading goes on. Since Armenia has occupied this region of Azerbaijan, almost 16 percent of the total country, this activity has existed with the support of Iran. Azerbaijan is defenseless in trying to stop this activity, as long as Armenia occupies this region.

Mr. Speaker, I was not present for debate on rollcall vote No. 515, rule providing for consideration of Gasoline for America's Security Act (H.R. 3893); rollcall vote No. 516, on approving the journal; and rollcall vote No. 517, substitute amendment by Stupak to