Department Of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2008--Continued

Floor Speech

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2008--Continued -- (House of Representatives - June 14, 2007)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McCAUL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, H.R. 2638, as currently written, prohibits the use of funds for additional unmanned aerial vehicles, or UAVs, until the Customs and Border Patrol informs the House and Senate Appropriations Committees that their use is cost-effective. I submit today that they are worth every penny. My amendment would strike that provision which would otherwise be protected by the rule.

These eyes of the sky bring exceptional operational capabilities to the table. They can stay airborne for 30 to 40 hours and can carry state-of-the-art technology through day and night cameras, radar tracking systems, and other surveillance tools.

UAVs working the borders have flown over 2,000 hours and aided in the arrests of nearly 3,900 illegal immigrants and the seizure of over 13,000 pounds of marijuana.

UAVs are not in sufficient quantities to provide economies of scale and, as such, will always be more expensive to operate than a pilot in a small aircraft. But, Mr. Chairman, cost is not the only consideration.

On March 20, 2007, a UAV detected and tracked six illegal aliens trying to cross the southern border. When border officials arrived on the scene, they seized 395 pounds of marijuana and arrested all six. Among the six was a fugitive wanted in Kings County, Washington, on charges of third-degree rape of a child.

We should be providing our border authorities with more technology and tools. We talked a lot about the fence but this is the technology piece. More technology and tools, not less. Had a UAV not detected the entry of those illegal immigrants, how many more children may have been victimized by sexual predators?

I think this is an important piece to our overall security of the border, and I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of my amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRITP

Mr. McCAUL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?

The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Texas has 2 1/2 minutes remaining.

Mr. McCAUL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, let me simply just say we obviously do not have enough manpower down at the border. These ``eyes in the skies,'' as we call them, provide the surveillance technology that is just absolutely critical to surveilling the border to stop this flood of illegal immigration and potential terrorism.

Mr. Chairman, with that, I would yield the remainder of my time to the gentleman from California (Mr. Bilbray).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McCAUL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, section 531 prohibits the implementation of MAX-HR. MAX-HR is the human resources program that allows DHS wide latitude in personnel matters such as transferring workers to areas where they may be needed during a national emergency. Congress gave the Department this ability so that it could move quickly to protect the country from terrorist threats.

While some authority is currently under judicial review, the bill as currently written would enjoin the entire program until courts decide.

If this section were to pass as written, it would result in an action that is not consistent with the purposes of Homeland Security.

My amendment would strike section 531 of this bill and allow current regulations to continue until the courts make their final judgment.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McCAUL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I respect the distinguished gentleman from North Carolina, but I would say I believe it's important that we let the courts decide this matter. It's under judicial review, just a small part of the human resources program at the Department of Homeland Security.

I think it would be a tremendous mistake for us in the Congress, as a separate branch of government, to essentially enjoin, essentially enjoin the executive branch in the human resource program that has combined 22 agencies, developed the human resources program that has been efficient in many respects, only because the courts have enjoined a very small portion. Again, let's let the courts decide this issue, and let's let the rest of the program go forward.

I know that our colleagues on the other side of the aisle would like to move the Department into a more unionized system that is not merit based. My view is that that would cripple our ability to respond in emergency situations. That was the view of the Congress at the time that we developed the Department of Homeland Security, and that is the view of this Congressman at this time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source