Providing for Further Consideration of H.R. National Defense
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
Mr. Speaker, the first thing is, I am baffled that this is even germane to the National Defense Authorization Act. Really.
I am not saying that the Survivors' Bill of Rights Act isn't good. It passed unanimously. But this amendment bribes States to enact the rights afforded in that Survivors' Bill of Rights Act.
When I was the president of the Arizona Senate, we didn't get Federal dollars when we went back and found a way to fund giving rape kits and making sure that we went back and started testing all of the old rape kits so we could start going after the bad guys.
This Survivors' Bill of Rights passed unanimously in 2016, but it is not a controversial concept, not at all. The concept is that States should do this. I mean, seriously.
I know you think it is really funny, that is good for you. Laugh away. But I am telling you right now, this has nothing to do with the National Defense Authorization Act.
States do this on their own when they have leadership in those States. This isn't something you blow Federal dollars on. This isn't something you necessarily need to do that for because States will do it, and many States are doing it. I know my own State is doing it and has been doing it for 8 years now.
This has nothing to do with military readiness, has nothing to do with what this bill is supposed to be doing.
Again, I find myself saying: How does this even sit germane to the underlying bill?
It is my understanding that the Rules Committee waived that issue, not the parliamentarian, on germaneness. So that is not really a qualified argument; that is not a legitimate argument.
But if we talk about the substance of this, there are States that have taken the action that you are wanting to take. Maybe that is where you should take the fight, instead of wedging it into the National Defense Authorization Act. The National Defense Authorization Act is meant to fund the military for readiness to defend this country.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Speaker, I oppose this amendment. It doesn't have anything to do with the National Defense Authorization Act. I encourage everyone to vote ``no'' on it, and I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Speaker, no one in this body believes that the United States military should be engaged in carrying out domestic policy on United States soil. We already have laws that prohibit that.
This amendment, however, would prohibit evidence obtained by the military in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act from being used in court or other legal proceedings.
This bill hasn't been to a committee this year. Last year, it was debated on the floor. This amendment stems from legislation that Representative Schiff introduced in response to rumors that President Trump was considering sending in the military to help quell the violence in Democrat-run cities during the summer of 2020. The military was never sent in, so this amendment is basically a solution in search of a problem.
The implications of this amendment are also unclear. We currently have a crisis on our southern border, a crisis that Democrats continue to ignore and is continually getting worse. We literally have about 8,000 to 10,000 people a day being encountered on the border, and then another 1,000 or more a day who are actually getting into the country as gotaways.
Some have suggested that the military could be sent down there to help stop this invasion. The question is, though, what happens if the situation at the southwest border becomes even more dire and, indeed, members of the military are sent in to help, and while helping and providing support, they obtain evidence of trafficking or smuggling, human trafficking, drug trafficking, et cetera? Will that evidence be excluded?
This is an issue that needs to go through regular order where the committees of jurisdiction can hold hearings and fully explore all possible consequences. That hasn't happened here.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Speaker, I find it interesting. Nobody on this side mentioned evidence adduced from unlawful activities should be admitted. Those are words, as so often happens with my colleague, that are being imputed.
No. No. I specifically said legal activity. I specifically said if the military is sent down to the border to help. There was no imputation that that would be illegal conduct. What I said was that they obtained evidence of trafficking or smuggling while serving down on the Southwest border.
Now, if that is legal conduct, and they encountered evidence of trafficking or smuggling, my query was, should that not be used, should that not be permitted as evidence, and the reality of it is, it should be used for evidence.
When we talk about law, for instance, criminal law, if a police officer engages in criminal conduct to obtain evidence, that evidence is suppressed, including additional evidence which is considered the fruit of the poisonous tree.
The question here, and the reason that I said this needs to go back for regular order, is what do you do when you are involved in legal conduct, and you happen upon evidence of smuggling or trafficking? That is the real issue here.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. BIGGS. The gentleman has already yielded his time and now wishes to take my time to explain.
The reality is he knows. This bill, or his amendment needs to go back for regular order for additional debate to determine all the consequences so when legal conduct produces or adduces evidence of smuggling or trafficking.
That is why I oppose this amendment. I urge my colleagues to do the same, and I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source