H.R. 5855, the DHS Appropriations Act

Floor Speech

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 5855, the FY13 Homeland Security Appropriations bill. I regret that this bill, especially during the amendment process on the floor of the House, became a political football. I hope that when the final bill emerges from negotiations with the Senate and the White House, it will reflect the will and priorities of the American people.
Funding appropriated by H.R. 5855 is intended to support and address the vital needs of our men and women working to ensure the country's homeland security. The bill appropriates a total of $46 billion for the Department in FY 2013--including $39.1 billion in discretionary spending, $1.4 billion in mandatory spending, and $5.5 billion for emergency disaster relief. The measure significantly increases funding for FEMA state and local grants and for Homeland cyber-security activities.

Despite these benefits, I have concerns about how the bill disregards the mandates of the Budget Control Act, how it treats civilian employees at DHS and how the bill delves into unprecedented territory regarding the reproductive rights of women.

The spending caps set by the bi-partisan Budget Control Act ensured that prioritized programs could be funded adequately even as discretionary reductions were achieved. The harmful discretionary top-line set by the House Republican budget, and facilitated by this bill, threatens funding for other equally vital programs, threatens American jobs, and threatens the services relied upon by our seniors and our veterans.

Further, I am concerned that the bill does not fund the .5 percent cost of living adjustment provided as part of the president's FY13 budget request. Federal employees have already sacrificed $60 billion of salary over ten years as part of the two-year pay freeze. Starting in January 2013, new federal employees will contribute more to their pensions to offset the $15 billion cost of Unemployment Insurance Extension legislation. And with this bill, federal employees are asked to give up what was already a small .5% partial COLA. This provision essentially extends for another year the 2-year pay freeze currently covering DHS employees.

Finally, I am disappointed by the passage and inclusion in the bill of an amendment offered by Steve King of Iowa, which I opposed and which prohibits the use of the funds in the bill from being used to implement the so called ``Morton Memos.'' The memos, written by ICE Director Morton, provide a plan to deploy ICE resources in the most cost effective manner. Specifically, they provide guidance to ensure that limited enforcement resources are focused primarily on criminals or other individuals who pose a threat to national security or public safety. The King amendment will prohibit the department from exercising this common sense prosecutorial discretion. It would force the Department to treat young people who were brought to the United States as kids and who have graduated from American schools the same as individuals who knowingly broke immigration laws and who have committed crimes in the United States. That makes no sense.

Bringing a bill to the floor that cuts the resources available to the men and women responsible for protecting the homeland security of the Nation and then tying their hands with unnecessary and ill-informed amendments is counterproductive and undercuts the bill's intended purpose.

Source