Providing for Consideration of H.R. 4830, Border Tunnel Prevention Act of 2006; for Consideration of H.R. 6094, Community Protection Act of 2006

PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 4830, BORDER TUNNEL PREVENTION ACT OF 2006; FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 6094, COMMUNITY PROTECTION ACT OF 2006; AND FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 6095, IMMIGRATION LAW ENFORCEMENT ACT OF 2006 -- (House of Representatives - September 21, 2006)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes.

Madam Speaker, immigration and border security are not new issues. These issues have been around for a while. They are serious issues, but they have been issues that have been ignored by this Republican leadership and this Republican Congress for years.

Notwithstanding the fact that President Bush has challenged us to come up with comprehensive immigration reform, which also includes tight border security, and notwithstanding the fact that this Congress passed what I believe is an objectionable immigration reform bill and the Senate has passed a more acceptable immigration reform bill and we are supposed to go to conference and work out the differences and produce a comprehensive immigration reform bill, as the President has requested, the leaders of this House have chosen to do nothing, not a thing.

So while many of us may disagree on some of the issues, this is a high priority for all Members of Congress. But some of us are questioning, why not do what we are supposed to do? Why not go to conference and work out the differences and come out with a comprehensive immigration reform bill that deals with border security and that deals with the issue that a lot of people are concerned about, what do you do with the 12 million people here in the United States who are undocumented?

Madam Speaker, the rule before us and the bills that will be considered if this rule is adopted is not about border security and immigration. That is not what we are doing here today. For those who are watching, this is not about real legislative progress. No, Madam Speaker, this rule and these bills are about politics. It is about a press release and trying to convince the voters that we in this Congress are actually doing something when, in fact, we are doing nothing.

Now, before my friends on the other side of the aisle roll their eyes and say, there he goes again, let me urge them to look at the calendar. The Republican leadership cancelled votes for tomorrow and plans to adjourn for the elections next Friday, September 29. The Senate is following a similar schedule. That gives us 1 week to consider these bills in both Chambers, pass and reconcile them before next Friday.

Now, it is not impossible, but the truth is there are competing comprehensive immigration and border security bills that have been passed by the House and Senate, as I have mentioned. The House passed its bill on December 16, 2005, and the Senate passed its version on May 25, 2006, but again, this House has refused to go to conference. It is puzzling because the Republicans, Madam Speaker, control the White House, the Republicans control the House of Representatives, and the Republicans control the Senate. One would think that since the Republicans control everything, they can get along with each other and actually move important legislation forward.

Madam Speaker, what we see on the issue of immigration reform and border security, quite frankly, is a failure of leadership. You have a dismal record on protecting our borders, a dismal record on dealing with illegal immigration. This is a failure of being able to legislate, to be able to do your job.

Instead, we are here again with another set of immigration and border security bills. Let us be honest with the American public. This is not a serious effort to legislate. No, Madam Speaker, this is about election politics. This is about the Republican leadership in the House trying to appeal to the cheap seats and gain some political points 1 week before we adjourn for the November election.

The gentleman from Georgia mentioned with great pride this legislative accomplishment that we passed last week, the border fence security bill which the Senate is now dealing with. It is important to point out to the American people that while it sounds nice, there is no money in it. There is no money to provide for the construction of such a fence. The chairman of the Homeland Security Committee before the Rules Committee last week could not even tell me how much it was going to cost, but we know it is going to be hundreds of millions of dollars, if not billions of dollars. So we pass a bill saying we want to do this, but no money. Guess what? Without the money, you cannot build it.

So what are we really doing here? Are we protecting the borders, or are we trying to put on a show for the American people before elections that somehow we are doing something meaningful when, in fact, we are not? We are wasting time.

The American people want comprehensive, compassionate immigration reform, and they want strict border security plans, not partisan legislation and not just a show to imply that somehow we are doing something when, in fact, we are not.

Madam Speaker, for 5 years the Republican-controlled House, Senate and White House have failed to move forward on comprehensive immigration and border security. Done nothing. We have a crisis today. It is a serious crisis in border security because Republican infighting has crippled anyone's ability to enact comprehensive reform.

Madam Speaker, with 1 week left before we adjourn, we should be considering meaningful legislation that will actually affect people's lives today. Where is a clean bill increasing the minimum wage? The Federal minimum wage is at $5.15 an hour. It has been that way for 9 years. I mean, how can you live on $5.15 an hour? We need to pass an increase in the minimum wage, not a minimum wage increase tied to a tax break for millionaires, but let us all agree that $5.15 an hour is not enough for somebody to live. They cannot get out of poverty on $5.15 an hour. Why can we not pass a clean minimum wage bill today? That would be something meaningful. That would impact people's lives today. We had time this year to vote ourselves a pay raise here in the Congress. Do you not think we could take a few minutes and pass a pay raise for those workers who are earning $5.15 an hour?

Where is legislation implementing the rest of the 9/11 Commission's recommendations? The gentleman talks about homeland security and the need to protect our border security. The nonpartisan 9/11 Commission has given this Congress Ds and Fs on implementing homeland security legislation. We should be ashamed of ourselves. We should be ashamed of ourselves that we have not enacted all of those recommendations. We need to do that. We could do that today. We should stay in session to tomorrow and do it.

Where is the Labor-HHS appropriation bill? Where are some of the other important pieces of legislation?

Madam Speaker, the truth is that this Republican leadership has proven that they are incapable of running the House of Representatives. Their priorities just do not mesh with those of the American people. Bringing divisive bills to the floor to be used as political ammunition in the upcoming elections is not leadership, but time and time again it is how the Republican leadership in the House operates. Instead of doing what is right for the American people, they continue to do what they think is necessary to be reelected.

Madam Speaker, the American people are sick and tired of business as usual. It is time for a change in leadership in this House. It is time for a new direction.

One other thing, Madam Speaker, this is a closed rule. It is a closed rule, which means you cannot amend it. You have to take it as is. No amendments are in order, not one. If these issues are so important, why can Members not have the opportunity to deliberate and to legislate, to be able to offer amendments? Why can we not amend these bills? Why does this have to be brought up under a closed process?

This is one rule we are debating on which is a closed rule, but really it is three closed rules because there are three separate bills we are going to be taking up and all of them under a closed process; you cannot amend them.

Now, it is not surprising that it is being brought to the House in this manner because democracy is dead in the House of Representatives. This place is run poorly and cynically. It has lost the trust of the American people. Every public opinion poll out there shows that we are held in the lowest esteem possible. People have had it. They know the way this place operates. They want this to be the people's House, not the House where a few special interests get to call the shots.

Madam Speaker, over the last several years, the Democrats have tried to offer amendments to various bills to improve our border security. Over the last 5 years, if these amendments were adopted, there would be 6,600 more Border Patrol agents, 14,000 more detention beds and 2,700 more immigration and enforcement agents along the border that now exists. That would be a positive thing if those things were adopted, but each and every time they have been objected to by the Republican majority in this House. They have been against increasing Border Patrol agents, against increasing detention beds, against more immigration enforcement agents along our border that now exists. Instead, we get a fence bill that is not paid for. Instead, we get these bills that are before us today that in all likelihood are going nowhere before we adjourn for Congress.

This is not the way we should run the House of Representatives. This is not the way to deal with border security issues and immigration reform. This is cynical what is going on here today. This is a rifleshot approach to a problem that needs a comprehensive approach.

We need to do so much better. So I am asking my colleagues to defeat this rule.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, let me again point out to everybody in this Chamber that the Republicans have controlled this place for a long time, and for the last 5 years, they have even controlled the White House. It is puzzling to me why they are all lamenting that we need to get things done when they have been in charge. Why can they not work with each other? Why can you not get things done?

The gentleman from Georgia talked about this comprehensive immigration bill. The one in the House he voted for. The one in the Senate he may not like. When the Senate passes a bill, and the House passes a bill, in this case Republican control both Houses, you get together, work out the differences and come up with a compromise.

You know, we should have a conferees meeting and work out that compromise and do what you are supposed to do, your job. This is not a radical or controversial idea. Let's work it out; let's do it right.

And he has yet to explain why all this has to be brought up under a closed process. Why can't we open this to amendments? We proposed last night in the Rules Committee, the Democrats, that this be an open rule, that Members be able to come down and amend this as they see fit. And that was voted down along party lines; all the Democrats voted for an open process, the Republicans as usual stuck together and voted to shut this process down. That is objectionable. This is so important, we should be able to, it should be open to amendments to any Member.

You know, again, I would say to the gentleman from Georgia, Democrats, if you would follow our lead and you had adopted the amendments that we proposed over the last 5 years, there would be 6,600 more Border Patrol agents, there would be 14,000 more detention beds, and 2,700 more immigration enforcement agents along our border than now exist. That, to me, would have been a positive accomplishment. But you rejected all that time and time again.

So I object to the manner in which you are bringing these bills up. This is all about politics. This is about trying to imply that you are doing something when you are not. And I object, once again, to a closed process. We need a little democracy in the House of Representatives. This should be an open process; it should be open to amendments.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, first let me say to my colleague, the chairman of the Rules Committee, that I am glad he can point to an instance where he has worked with a Democrat. My question remains, why can't Republicans work with Republicans? The comprehensive Senate immigration bill has a fence provision in it. And if the Senate and the House can go to conference and start working out these differences, he could get his fence and we could also get a lot of other issues solved as well.

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. McGOVERN. I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I would simply say to the gentleman that I very much want us to be able to complete and address a wide range of issues. The fact that we are able to come together now in a bipartisan way and address these areas of agreement is something I think that can be celebrated, because Republicans are working with Republicans, but Republicans are also working with Democrats who are like-minded to try and deal with some of these very important security issues. I thank my friend for yielding.

Mr. McGOVERN. Again, it is frustrating that when the President of the United States is urging us to approach this issue in a comprehensive way, that the Republican leadership of this House can't get together with the Republican leadership of the Senate and address a whole range of issues.

I think it is also important to point out so that there is no misunderstanding for those who may be observing these proceedings that, even if the Senate passes the so-called fence bill, they should be under no illusion that all of a sudden a fence is going to be built along the southern border of this country. The fact of the matter is there is no money for it. This is an authorization, not an appropriation; and nobody has been able to identify where the money is going to come from.

The other thing is, again, I go back to what I said before. We need more border security agents on the border right now. We need more detention beds. We need more immigration enforcement agents along the border. We have tried, we have tried over and over and over again to get the majority to allow us just the right to offer amendments to be able to address some of these issues and have been rejected over and over and over again.

So I would simply restate what I said in the very beginning, and that is that what is going on here today is somewhat cynical, because I think the other side knows that at least with the three bills that we are talking about here today, the chances of them being enacted by the Senate are almost zero between now and a week from Friday; and we are not going to accomplish anything except a press release. And at the same time, we are not addressing the challenge that President Bush has put before us, which is comprehensive immigration reform.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I think we need to be careful with words. Nobody is advocating amnesty. I don't think President Bush is advocating an amnesty. I don't think Senators HAGEL or MARTINEZ or MCCAIN are advocating amnesty.

What people want is action. What people are frustrated with is the fact that this Republican Congress has done nothing. We passed the comprehensive immigration reform bill in the House. They passed one in the Senate. We want to go to conference to work out the differences and come up with an approach that will work.

Instead, what have you done? You have gone around the country holding hearings at taxpayers' expense, and the reviews have been dismal. The headlines from the leading newspapers from across the country are ``All Talk No Action on Immigration,'' and ``Immigration Hearings Misfire.'' ``Field Hearings a Waste of Time and Money.'' ``Immigration Hearing Staged to Run Out the Clock'' so we don't do anything meaningful. That is not what we want; we want real action.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

I hope that all Members will join me and vote ``no'' on the previous question so I can amend the rule and allow the House to consider an amendment by Representative Jackson-Lee that would really take on the issue of border security rather than just pay it lip service. The proposal would amend H.R. 6095 to equip the Department of Homeland Security with the resources the 9/11 Commission says we need to secure our borders, to shut down the alien smuggling business, and to catch and hold illegal immigrants entering our country.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to print the text of the amendment and extraneous materials immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Wamp). Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Massachusetts?

There was no objection.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, the Republican majority in this House continues to approach border security and immigration control in its usual ineffective and piecemeal approach, putting election-year politics ahead of real and responsible solutions. Republicans are big talkers when it comes to border security and immigration reform, but they have never been willing to put their money where their mouth is. The bills we will consider on the House floor today are more of the same. This debate and these bills are supposed to remind voters that Republicans are somehow tough on immigration, but instead they just remind all of us that Republicans have not been able to make any progress on the urgent issue of border security.

So I urge all Members of this body to vote ``no'' on the previous question so that we can bring up this amendment to actually do something about the problems on our Nation's borders instead of just talking about it.

The 9/11 Commission has given this Congress Ds and Fs when it comes to homeland security, and we have a particularly low grade when it comes to protecting our borders. Let us not only do the right thing. Let us do something that is real.

People are cynical. They are tired of politics as usual in this House. They are tired of these last-minute bills that come up before elections to somehow imply that we are doing something when we are not. We have a serious problem on our borders. We need serious action. This is not serious action.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question. If that vote does not prevail, vote ``no'' on a closed rule. If these issues are important, we should be able to amend these bills. We need a little democracy in this House. Let's get this right.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://thomas.loc.gov