[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 11] [House] [Pages 15423-15430] [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]EMERGENCY BORDER SECURITY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS, FISCAL YEAR 2010 Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 6080) making emergency supplemental appropriations for border security for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and for other purposes. The Clerk read the title of the bill. The text of the bill is as follows: H.R. 6080 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and for other purposes, namely: [[Page 15424]] TITLE I DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection salaries and expenses For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses'', $253,900,000, to remain available until September 30, 2011, of which $39,000,000 shall be for costs to maintain U.S. Customs and Border Protection Officer staffing on the Southwest Border of the United States, $29,000,000 shall be for hiring additional U.S. Customs and Border Protection Officers for deployment at ports of entry on the Southwest Border of the United States, $175,900,000 shall be for hiring additional Border Patrol agents for deployment to the Southwest Border of the United States, and $10,000,000 shall be to support integrity and background investigation programs. border security fencing, infrastructure, and technology For an additional amount for ``Border Security Fencing, Infrastructure, and Technology'', $14,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2011, for costs of designing, building, and deploying tactical communications for support of enforcement activities on the Southwest Border of the United States. air and marine interdiction, operations, maintenance, and procurement For an additional amount for ``Air and Marine Interdiction, Operations, Maintenance, and Procurement'', $32,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2012, for costs of acquisition and deployment of unmanned aircraft systems. construction and facilities management For an additional amount for ``Construction and Facilities Management'', $6,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2011, for costs to construct up to 2 forward operating bases for use by the Border Patrol to carry out enforcement activities on the Southwest Border of the United States. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement salaries and expenses For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses'', $80,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2011, of which $30,000,000 shall be for law enforcement activities targeted at reducing the threat of violence along the Southwest Border of the United States, and $50,000,000 shall be for hiring of additional agents, investigators, intelligence analysts, and support personnel. Federal Law Enforcement Training Center salaries and expenses For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses'', $8,100,000, to remain available until September 30, 2011, for costs to provide basic training for new U.S. Customs and Border Protection Officers, Border Patrol agents, and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement personnel. GENERAL PROVISIONS (rescissions) Sec. 101. From unobligated balances made available to U.S. Customs and Border Protection ``Border Security Fencing, Infrastructure, and Technology'', $100,000,000 are rescinded: Provided, That section 401 shall not apply to the amount in this section. TITLE II DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Sec. 201. For an additional amount for the Department of Justice for necessary expenses for increased law enforcement activities related to Southwest border enforcement, $196,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2011: Provided, That funds shall be distributed to the following accounts and in the following specified amounts: (1) ``Administrative Review and Appeals'', $2,118,000. (2) ``Detention Trustee'', $7,000,000. (3) ``Legal Activities, Salaries and Expenses, General Legal Activities'', $3,862,000. (4) ``Legal Activities, Salaries and Expenses, United States Attorneys'', $9,198,000. (5) ``United States Marshals Service, Salaries and Expenses'', $29,651,000. (6) ``United States Marshals Service, Construction'', $8,000,000. (7) ``Interagency Law Enforcement, Interagency Crime and Drug Enforcement'', $21,000,000. (8) ``Federal Bureau of Investigation, Salaries and Expenses'', $24,000,000. (9) ``Drug Enforcement Administration, Salaries and Expenses'', $33,671,000. (10) ``Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Salaries and Expenses'', $37,500,000. (11) ``Federal Prison System, Salaries and Expenses'', $20,000,000. TITLE III THE JUDICIARY Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial Services salaries and expenses For an additional amount for ``Salaries and Expenses'', $10,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2011: Provided, That notwithstanding section 302 of division C of Public Law 111-117, funding shall be available for transfer between Judiciary accounts to meet increased workload requirements resulting from immigration and other law enforcement initiatives. TITLE IV GENERAL PROVISIONS Sec. 401. Each amount appropriated or otherwise made available under this Act is designated as an emergency requirement and necessary to meet emergency needs pursuant to sections 403(a) and 423(b) of S. Con. Res. 13 (111th Congress), the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2010. Sec. 402. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act or any other provision of law, during the period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act and ending on September 30, 2014, the filing fee and fraud prevention and detection fee required to be submitted with an application for admission as a nonimmigrant under section 101(a)(15)(L) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(L)) shall be increased by $2,250 for applicants that employ 50 or more employees in the United States if more than 50 percent of the applicant's employees are nonimmigrants admitted pursuant to section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of such Act or section 101(a)(15)(L) of such Act. (b) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act or any other provision of law, during the period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act and ending on September 30, 2014, the filing fee and fraud prevention and detection fee required to be submitted with an application for admission as a nonimmigrant under section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b)) shall be increased by $2,000 for applicants that employ 50 or more employees in the United States if more than 50 percent of the applicant's employees are such nonimmigrants or nonimmigrants described in section 101(a)(15)(L) of such Act. (c) During the period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act and ending on September 30, 2014, all amounts collected pursuant to the fee increases authorized under this section shall be deposited in the General Fund of the Treasury. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price) and the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers) each will control 20 minutes. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from North Carolina. General Leave Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 6080. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from North Carolina? There was no objection. Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I rise to urge adoption of H.R. 6080, a bill to address the urgent need for enhanced security on our Southwest border. Violence on the Mexican side of the border has intensified because of turf battles among murderous transnational criminal organizations competing for drug, alien, and weapon trafficking business. The bill would provide $600 million to enable the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice, and the Judiciary, in cooperation with the National Guard, to counter this threat, building on the current border enforcement surge. This funding is urgently needed to counter the pressures our law enforcement agencies and our border communities currently face. Madam Speaker, the bill is fully offset. It includes a $100 million reduction in the Department of Homeland Security's border security infrastructure and technology account due to an ongoing reassessment of the SBInet program. The bill also increases, for 5 years, the cost for two visas which permit foreign workers to come and work in the United States. These fee increases would apply only to companies with more than 50 employees and for whom the majority of their workforce is visa- holding foreign workers. The House passed a very similar version of this border security supplemental bill 2 weeks ago, partially offset and partially on a well-justified emergency basis. Because the Senate amended the House- passed bill, we are voting on the package again today. The most significant change the Senate made was to fully offset the bill, adding the visa fee increases. Because of the Constitutional requirement that revenue-generating bills initiate in the House, the bill before us today has been introduced as a new bill but with provisions identical to the Senate-passed [[Page 15425]] bill. Therefore, should the House approve this bill today, it will need to be taken up again by the Senate, hopefully at the earliest possible date. For the Department of Homeland Security, the bill provides a total of $394 million, including: $176 million to hire a thousand new Border Patrol agents. That funding will bring us to a total of 21,370 Border Patrol agents, a 70 percent increase since 2006. $68 million to retain 270 Customs and Border Protection officers and hire 250 additional officers. With this bill, there will be over 20,700 CBP officers working to enhance port of entry operations. There is $32 million to procure two additional unmanned aircraft systems; $80 million to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, ICE, which includes $30 million to pay for four new Border Enforcement Security Task Forces, training and support for Mexican law enforcement partners, and a staffing surge for ICE's criminal alien removal efforts. The remaining $50 million will be used to hire additional ICE investigators, intelligence analysts, and support personnel for a permanent expansion of ICE's presence along the border. These new personnel will focus on disrupting the criminal enterprises that fuel violence in Mexico. There is $6 million to construct two new forward operating bases for the Border Patrol. For the Department of Justice, the bill provides $196 million in support of investigations and crime control along the Southwest border, including $38 million for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives; $34 million for the Drug Enforcement Administration; $30 million for the U.S. Marshals Service; and $24 million for the Federal Bureau of Investigation. {time} 1020 Finally, for the judiciary, the bill provides $10 million to meet increased workload requirements resulting from immigration and other law enforcement initiatives. I want to recognize especially, Madam Speaker, the hard work of our border State Representatives who were instrumental in getting the supplemental border security bill initially passed. They have signaled their full support for the House to take up this latest version from the Senate, and we will hear from a number of them during the debate this morning. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to adopt this bill to address these critical border security challenges which, while they are most acute on the southwest border, constitute a serious national threat which we ignore at our peril. With that, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I might consume. Madam Speaker, it's been now 47 days, almost 6 weeks, since our subcommittee marked up the fiscal 2011 appropriations bill that would fund the Department of Homeland Security. Forty-seven days. Normally, after you mark up a bill in subcommittee, it immediately goes to the full committee, and then immediately to the floor of the House for us to act on the entire appropriations for the entire Department of Homeland Security. For some reason, the Democrat leadership in the House chose to delay the markup of the funding bill for the Department of Homeland Security now 6 weeks. And instead, they're bringing up this piecemeal supplemental bill that would make a nice amendment to the appropriations bill for the Department of Homeland Security if we could get that bill to us. And this supplemental, if passed, has to go back to the Senate, who is gone for the summer, before it can become law, even if we pass it here. And number two, it won't take effect until next year. So, Madam Speaker, I'm asking, why are we here? Why did we come back for this? Because it can't take effect until next year and it can't take effect until the Senate comes back to pass on it. And they're gone until September. So why are we here? I don't know. I don't know. Forty- seven days that we have been waiting to bring up funding for the whole Department of Homeland Security. Homeland security, flippantly dealt with by the Democrat majority. Now, here's what this bill before us today won't do. This bill won't address the massive and inexplicable cuts the President proposed to cut the Coast Guard and to the Customs and Border Protection's aerial resources. The President submitted a budget to the subcommittee cutting Coast Guard, slashing the Border assets. The subcommittee in our markup corrected that, but we can't get that bill to come onto the floor. This bill won't do enough to improve our interdiction capabilities and stop the flow of drugs into northern Mexico and through the source and transit zones. This bill won't address any of the post-Christmas Day attack needs for aviation security or watchlisting. All of these were dealt with in the regular bill, if we could get it before the House. But this piecemeal approach doesn't work. And this bill surely won't address the numerous other homeland security challenges facing the country that range from emergency preparedness, to immigration enforcement, to cybersecurity. Simply put, this bill does nothing to make up for the fact that the fiscal 2011 Homeland Security bill is nowhere in sight. Why are we taking up this piecemeal approach? So it's all about, I guess, politics. It's all about politics. I ask the majority, where's the bill? Bring us the bill. We can amend it with this supplemental, make a modest change in the bill. Just bring us the bill. Madam Speaker, our country's facing many grave threats to our security. In the wake of the Christmas Day, Times Square, and Fort Hood attacks, and with a drug war waging along our border, it's a complete dereliction of duty by the Democrat majority to avoid moving the fiscal 2011 Homeland Security appropriations bill. So let's be absolutely clear about what we are doing here today. Yes, we are improving, we would improve the House Democrats' incomplete and deficit-increasing border security supplemental, but this bill won't take effect until next year. Why are we here? According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, not a single dime of this bill will be spent until fiscal 2011. If they had brought forth the Homeland Security appropriations bill for the whole Department, we could have avoided a supplemental altogether. We could have made the changes in that bill that this bill suggests, perhaps, and all would have been fine. Homeland security would have again reached the importance that it has in the past. Instead, now homeland security is sort of a secondary thought, apparently, by the majority, because they won't bring us the bill. So what that tells me is that we should be addressing all of our homeland security issues here today, not just putting a Band-Aid on some of our urgent border security needs with this supplemental. In fact, this supplemental, as I have said, might have made a very worthwhile amendment to the full security appropriations bill if the majority would bring it out and let it be discussed. But they control the rules, and they've said, no, we don't want to discuss the whole matter of homeland security. We want to address just these small pieces of it. So again we ask, where's the bill and why are we here? The fact of the matter is that the Democrat majority should be governing and Congress should be addressing our urgent security needs in the most responsible and disciplined way possible. Sadly, as demonstrated by the Democrat majority's repeated attempts to bend the rules and their lethargic pace and inaction on critical security issues like funding for our brave troops, that is certainly not the case this year. The bottom line is we desperately need to get our homeland security right. We need to address our security needs with real solutions, not partial fixes that circumvent regular order and that employ questionable offsets, as this bill does. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, our distinguished ranking minority member has asked a legitimate [[Page 15426]] question, and that is, where is the 2011 regular Homeland Security bill? He says it's nowhere in sight. He knows very well it's clearly in sight. The 2011 Homeland Security appropriations bill has been marked up in subcommittee. It's been put together with full bipartisan participation. It directly addresses the Coast Guard and border security matters that he has stressed. And this emergency measure here today in no way detracts from that. But this is an emergency. This is something that needs to be urgently addressed. Unfortunately, the Senate earlier stripped out these border provisions from the supplemental appropriations bill, and so we are here today passing this and getting this done at the earliest possible moment. {time} 1030 I would now like to yield 2 minutes to a subcommittee member who has been an important participant in putting this effort together, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Rodriguez). Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Madam Speaker, I want to thank the chairman for his great work on this issue. He has been the champion on these issues and responsive to the needs of our borders. Border security is one of my highest priorities. I represent 785 miles of the Mexican border, more border with Mexico than any other Member of Congress. As the vice chairman of the Homeland Security Appropriations Committee, we have made making our border more secure a high priority. Earlier this month, the House passed a supplemental appropriations bill that continued funding for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and in addition included $701 million in much-needed border security funding. This is funding that our men and women on the border are asking for and need to get the job done. We all know the violence in Mexico has escalated. We need to ensure the U.S. borders are not left vulnerable. This new version is much smaller than the previous one cut by the Senate. This bill does not have the funding for Operation Stonegarden, a much-needed program supported by many bipartisan Members. Nonetheless, I support the chairman on his effort and thank him for his leadership. This bill will target funds just as the previous House-passed supplemental did. This includes an additional 1,000 Border Patrol agents and 250 additional officers at our land ports of entry, which are critical and important at this point in time. This is a significant step towards securing our border, and I want to thank the chairman for his leadership in this area and ensuring that the border becomes a priority. Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the ranking Republican on the full committee, the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis). Mr. LEWIS of California. Madam Speaker, I very much appreciate my colleague yielding. I thank not only the gentleman for yielding, but the chairman as well, for their cooperative working relationship with me. On the other hand, Madam Speaker, it really pains me to have to be here today and comment on this emergency bill. Securing our borders, thwarting ruthless drug cartels, and enforcing immigration laws should unquestionably be among our highest priorities. But why are we here today, with only seven weeks remaining in this fiscal year, debating a supplemental that CBO says will not take effect until next year? So we are going to solve a problem for 2010 that can't even begin to be enforced until next year. This bill will have to go back to the Senate because of the way it is structured. Meanwhile, there is no plan to complete the vital FY 2011 Homeland Security and Defense appropriations bills. The chairman mentioned that the homeland bill had been marked up, et cetera, but it will not be in the full committee, no chance to amend it on the floor, et cetera. It is business as usual. This bill is only on the floor today to allow the Democratic majority to claim that they care about border security. It won't go into effect soon. It won't solve our border problems, and it makes a mockery of our annual appropriations process, where these problems should be handled. Even the bill's $600 million worth of new spending is paid for with questionable tactics. Avoiding cuts to wasteful government spending, the Democratic majority is penalizing businesses with increased fees. How are de facto tax increases going to increase jobs and help our economy? And we will be paying for these so-called emergency funds for some time because they will result in increased operating costs for future years as well. Madam Speaker, with the drug war continuing to escalate along the Southwest border and the States clamoring for help, and with the cost of illegal immigration, the American people expect real solutions from Congress. Instead, we have another round of throwing money at problems with no real understanding of how we are going to get out of this mess. We should have already completed fiscal year 2011 appropriation bills for homeland security and defense, as has been suggested, and taken care of these problems in an orderly and rational way. Instead, we are left with haphazard schemes that seem more like political cover than real budget solutions to our security. This is not the way the Congress should get its work done. Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Cuellar), another of our border members, and the chairman of our authorizing Subcommittee on Border, Maritime and Global Counterterrorism. Mr. CUELLAR. Madam Speaker, I certainly want to thank the chairman, Chairman Price, for the leadership in this emergency funding to be allocated to the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice for enhanced Southern border security. And to all the border members, I as a border member understand why this is very important. Also I want to thank the ranking member, Mr. Lewis, and also Mr. Rogers, for the work they are doing on this issue also. We join here today at a critical juncture of our border and homeland security. Now more than ever we need to allocate additional resources to our Nation's border. As the chairman of the Homeland Security Subcommittee for Border, Maritime and Global Counterterrorism, and as a Congressman that represents 250 miles of the Texas-Mexico border, where I drink the water, breathe the air, understand the border very well, I can tell you that the communities I represent are on the front line of our Nation's border and homeland security. I recently got an official briefing by the Assistant Secretary of ICE, Mr. Morton, and got some of the most up-to-date threats facing us on our border. And certainly for our Members, I sure would like to show you some videos for anybody interested in seeing what is happening across the river. The threat is real, and we need to take action now, whether it is the 1,000 Border Patrol agents, the ICE agents, ATF, judiciary, or prosecutors that we are trying to add to CBP for our land ports and our airports, this is important. I am a little disappointed that the Senate took out the Operation Stonegarden, but we are working with Chairman Price to put that money back because that money is important for our local law enforcement. So, Madam Speaker, as a member of the border delegation, I certainly ask the House and Senate leadership to support this and other border security funding. This is not a Texas issue, nor a partisan issue. This is an American issue for the safety. So we stand up today for our communities, for our Federal, State, and local law enforcement to give them the additional resources that they need to secure our border. Finally, this is one step, and a critical step, forward in our ability to detect, deter, and disrupt illegal activity along the U.S.- Mexico border. Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, I would now like to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Arizona (Ms. Giffords), another border [[Page 15427]] member who from her first day here has worked tirelessly on this border security issue. Ms. GIFFORDS. Thank you, Chairman Price, I appreciate your leadership on this issue, and the other border members who appreciate this difficult situation that we have. Repeatedly we heard from our colleagues across the aisle, why are we here? Why are we here? Well, we are here because we are sent here by our constituents to be their voices in Washington. And my constituents are the most heavily impacted in terms of illegal immigration. My sector had over 242,000 apprehensions, over 1.2 million pounds of marijuana seized last year. Mr. Chairman, that is why we are here. We are here because residents in my district are sick and tired of all of the partisan bickering and the political games around securing the U.S.-Mexico border. That is why we are here. We heard from across the aisle it is all about politics. Well, let me tell you about politics. This is the third time that we are here. The first time we were here on July 1st, the second time on July 28th, and now here on August 10th. The House is saying yes to more Border Patrol agents on the ground. We are saying yes to agents at the ports of entry. We are saying yes to more forward operating bases. Why are we here? We are here because the Congress cannot turn its back on the American people, and those people who are most heavily impacted by illegal immigration. We are here because the Senate has refused to do the responsible thing and yet again for the third time has sent this back to us. Politics? Well, the Senate needs to come back and deal with this issue. For all of the talk about securing the border and protecting American citizens, here we have an opportunity to actually do that, and we are not. We are here because my constituents are sick and tired of all the political rhetoric. They want to see us get the job done. This should be a bipartisan issue. I urge the Senate to return immediately to pass this bill. Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Will the gentlelady yield? Ms. GIFFORDS. I yield to the gentleman from Kentucky. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired. Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. I yield the gentlelady 2 additional minutes. Ms. GIFFORDS. I yield to the gentleman from Kentucky. {time} 1040 Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Is the gentlelady aware that the President proposed to cut the Border Patrol in his budget submission to the Congress? Ms. GIFFORDS. To me, it doesn't matter what the President of the United States proposes along the U.S.-Mexico border. I am a Member of the United States Congress. I am sent here by my constituents to fight for their needs. That is why I repeatedly asked for the National Guard to be deployed to the border. Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Reclaiming my time. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman has the time; the gentleman yielded to her. Ms. GIFFORDS. That is why it was so important to have the National Guard deployed on the border. We are here because today the National Guard is deploying to Arizona and the Southwest border. They were designed to be deployed not in a vacuum but with increased members of the Border Patrol that will be trained, that will have equipment, that will have---- Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Wouldn't the gentlelady prefer that the Congress pass the whole bill for the Department of Homeland Security rather than this piecemeal approach? Ms. GIFFORDS. Madam Speaker, for my constituents, the people that reside in my district, what matters is that we get the job done. They don't care about all of the partisan back and forth and this and that, what happens here. Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. The point is that we are not getting the job done because we will not pass the regular bill. Ms. GIFFORDS. This is my time, sir. When the National Guard was blindly deployed early this month--which took a lot of work from many of us to have the National Guard back on the border--they were designed to be deployed not in a vacuum. They were designed to have members of our Border Patrol trained up so that the Guard wouldn't have to be there forever and that we would have increased forward operating bases, that we would have an increased aerial surveillance system, that we would have a beefing up at the ports of entry. This was all designed with this emergency supplemental funding in mind, and the Senate blew it again. This is not a partisan issue. This is something that Democrats and Republicans can do to fight for what's right for the people of America. Madam Speaker, I serve on the House Armed Services Committee. We pass very large budgets securing America's interests, and it is critical that we get this job done. Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I understand the gentlelady from Arizona's frustrations. In fact, I sympathize with her. I made the same arguments she has just made in trying to bring up to the floor of this House the funding bill for the entire Department of Homeland Security, for the Coast Guard and for the Secret Service and for the Border Patrol and for all of the other agencies, the 22 that make up the Department. I made those arguments: Why are we wasting time? Let's get on with it. And yet the majority will not bring up the bill that funds the whole Department. We could have cured this months ago. It's been 6 weeks, Madam Speaker, since we passed the bill in the subcommittee that would have taken care of all these problems. And, yes, I want to see politics out of it, too, but you're in control, and you won't let us bring that bill to the floor. Instead, we are faced with this little piecemeal bill here, trying to correct the President's slash of the Border Patrol when he submitted his budget to the Congress. So, yes, I sympathize with the gentlelady. I wish we could get that bill up here, too, and stop playing politics with national security. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to a distinguished member of our authorizing committee, Representative Jackson Lee. Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I am very glad that Democrats are doing the responsible thing, and we know we need to be doing more. This is an important step because it substitutes for some of the misguided legislative initiatives that States are promoting, such as Arizona and Texas. I know there is a sense of desperation, but we on this side of the border have to ensure and have to be able to move forward on border security, and as well for those of us who are arguing vigorously for the comprehensive approach, addressing the needs of so many who are here simply wanting to work. We have to look to both directions. So I am rising to support this bill and this legislation, recognizing that there are people who are crying their heart out, saying when is this Congress going to do comprehensive immigration reform? But just as we have to clean this up, we've got a problem in those on the other side of the aisle not recognizing that we have to do this as a total package. But the Border Patrol agents funding, the CBP funding, $68 million to hire 250 new Customs and Border Protection personnel is important. The tactical communications is important. For those of us who live on the border, who have been to the border, who know border areas, we understand that the value of this is also to save lives, save the many people who are coming here for work but are dying in the desert, children, women who are coming here--yes, out of desperation, but still they are coming and dying in these deserts. This has to be stopped. We do need more monies for ATF and DEA. In my own city of Houston, it is [[Page 15428]] a center point, unfortunately, for a lot of drug cartels and gunrunning. So I know that there is an emergency. It is relevant to do this today. But I wish my friends as well would stop blocking us from looking holistically at real, comprehensive immigration reform, so that people who want to come here to work can, so that young people who want to go to school can, so that families who are innocent and want to be here without being jeopardized by phony laws and can stay here and pay and invest into this Nation. I support this legislation. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to come before you today in support of H.R. 6080, the ``Emergency Border Security Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2010,''--a bill that appropriates $600 million for border security activities along the Southwest Border, including $254 million for Customs and Border Protection, of which $176 million would be used to hire additional border patrol agents, as well as $196 million for the Justice Department, and $80 million for Immigration and Customs Enforcement. As Chairwoman of the Homeland Security Transportation Security & Infrastructure Protection Subcommittee, I want to thank Chairman Obey and Ranking Member Lewis for your leadership on this timely legislation. This is an important bill that provides the necessary funding that is essential to the assistance our Border States so greatly needs. Our Border States are frustrated and in need of targeted assistance. In recent months, I have attended a number of different hearings, meetings with local and state officials, and press conferences on immigration, combating the drug trade, and improving the border, and in almost all instances, I have heard the same comment: Border States are frustrated. The deeply misguided Arizona Law, (SB1070) for example, is an expression of that frustration. Unless we want to see more of a backlash, we in the Federal Government must do more to help our Border States, which is vital to securing our nation and upholding our immigration laws, and helping local and state officials secure our Border States. The United States continues to fight the battle against the powerful drug trafficking organizations that have plagued our sister cities just across the border with violence. We have been fortunate thus far that for the most part the violence has not spilled over into the United States, but we cannot depend on being insulated forever. Instability abroad is a danger to stability at home, and we have a vested interest in helping our neighbors to the southwest power away from the criminal organizations that have threatened the safety of their citizens and brought drugs into our country. First of all, we need to do more than just provide ``boots on the ground'' to help secure our borders. While deterrence through additional personnel is essential to improving security, several members of the law enforcement community have stressed the importance of providing more resources for investigators and detectives, who can help to ferret out and dismantle the criminal activities taking place on our borders. Moreover, while federal agencies have improved their coordination with the Border States, communication within local and State authorities continues to be problematic. Communication in disperse rural areas presents a particular challenge. At a hearing on the Merida Initiative, I heard the moving testimony of a rancher from rural Arizona, Mr. Bill McDonald. He pointed out how a lack of resources and a rapid turnover rate make communication extremely important, but extremely lacking. These rural areas, and the people who live there, are in many cases the most vulnerable to human traffickers and drug traffickers. There is a desperate need for Border States to receive the necessary support to effectively secure our borders from threats and ensure a safe and stable environment for our border residents. More robust, well funded, and well resourced law enforcement systems are exactly what our Border States and residents demand. These appropriations to improve law enforcement efforts at our Border States are only a small part of more comprehensive reforms to our immigration system. Reforms that the American people are crying out for and that I sincerely hope my fellow Members will stand behind. This legislation honors our first responsibility to protect the American people by giving law enforcement the tools they need to address the threat of violence near the U.S.-Mexico border. With investments in expanding the number of Border Patrol agents and Customs and Border Protection officers, improving our border surveillance efforts, and increasing resources for anti-smuggling investigations, we are tackling our border security challenges head on. This is one of the central pillars of bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired. Members should heed the gavel. Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, Mr. Smith of Texas. Mr. SMITH of Texas. I want to thank the gentleman from Kentucky, a senior member of the Appropriations Committee, for yielding me time. Madam Speaker, I support the passage of this bill. Additional funds for border security are always a step in the right direction, but if the Democrats were serious about immigration enforcement, they would include more funds for interior enforcement. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement says it doesn't have enough resources to enforce our immigration laws, yet this bill contains no funds for work-site enforcement that is needed to protect jobs for citizens and legal immigrants. Last week, an illegal immigrant drunk driver killed a nun and critically injured two others. He had two earlier convictions for drunk driving. If ICE had sufficient funds for enforcement, this tragedy could have been avoided. Madam Speaker, in many ways, this bill represents an opportunity lost, and I regret that even though I support passage of the bill. Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Madam Speaker, I will yield myself such time as I may consume in closing. Again, I wish we had, Madam Speaker, the bill that funds the entire Department of Homeland Security before us instead of this piecemeal approach. I don't fathom why the majority will not bring forth that bill that's been marked up since 47 days ago--6 weeks--and yet they refuse to bring it out. Instead, they bring this piecemeal bill out there that only deals with a particular aspect of the entire Homeland Security bill. And, number two, as I've said before, even if we pass this bill here, it still has to go back to the Senate before it can become law, and they're gone until the middle of September. And this bill won't spend any money until next year anyway. So that's why I say why are we doing it this way? Why can't we just bring out the bill and deal with it? It includes all of this as well. And yet the majority refuses to do that. It's all about politics, Madam Speaker. We are all concerned about that border, about the crime that is taking place, about the illicit drugs coming across, illegal people coming across. And we have devoted so much of the Nation's energy and monies to try to seal that border to little effect, it seems. And yet if we had the whole Department of Homeland Security budget here on the floor so that we could at once deal with Coast Guard, with Secret Service, with Border Patrol, with enforcement of the laws against illegal immigration, if we had all of those matters before us, we could deal with it holistically. But they won't do it. Instead, we have this bill which won't become law until next year anyway. So I ask the Speaker, why did you call us back in session on this bill knowing that it could not become law until next year anyway? Puzzlement. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time. {time} 1050 Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, it seems that a good part of the debate this morning has been about what this bill is not. Both sides have mentioned the need for comprehensive immigration reform, and I couldn't agree more. We cannot enforce our way out of this immigration challenge. I have never met a border security officer who claims otherwise. This is a much broader challenge than simply enforcement or securing the border. I would hope most Members understand that and understand the urgency of moving ahead on comprehensive immigration reform. [[Page 15429]] What is before us this morning is an emergency measure dealing with some border security challenges arising from the cartel violence and gang activity in Mexico which requires an emergency response, an immediate response, and a targeted response. That is what this bill provides. We have also heard a great deal about the 2011 Homeland Security Appropriations bill. Indeed, this emergency supplemental is not the regular bill. Nor is it a substitute for the regular bill. In fact, it is just what it says, it is a supplement to ongoing appropriations, a supplement designed to address this critical situation out on the southwest border which our colleagues on the border have testified to very convincingly here this morning. The 2011 Homeland Security bill is alive and well. It has been assembled on a bipartisan basis after months of hearings and discussions. It has been approved at the subcommittee level, and Members will be seeing that bill very shortly. And believe me, on many of these items in the supplemental, you will be hearing from us again: the BEST teams, the border enforcement security task forces, a proven device; the forward-operating bases; and, of course, the beefing up of the Border Patrol and the cadre of CBP officers. All of these things are ongoing challenges, but they are also immediate challenges. This is an important supplemental to the regular bill. This was true when we first passed it in early July, and it is still true today. Today we are compensating for the fact that border security was dropped from the supplemental appropriations bill by the Senate. But the Senate, fortunately, in recent days passed the bill before us. We are now passing the bill that they passed so as to expedite the targeting of these funds for this immediate problem in the Southwest. This is a much-needed bill. We have had ample testimony to that effect. I urge my colleagues to support it here this morning. Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Speaker, today, the House is considering H.R. 6080, legislation to provide $600 million for increased security activities at our Nation's southwest border. As Chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security, I have visited the U.S.-Mexico border and heard the concerns of local residents firsthand. I understand the imperative for more resources to combat the drug cartels and the threat of potential violence in the region. Therefore, I support the bill before the House today. H.R. 6080 is an integral part of providing the Department of Homeland Security and its federal partners with additional personnel and equipment necessary to combat violence and better secure America's borders. Specifically, H.R. 6080 provides funding to put more boots on the ground for Customs and Border Protection (CBP), including additional Border Patrol agents and CBP officers who secure the areas at and between our ports of entry. Increased interdictions along the border translate into increased additional referrals for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). I am pleased that H.R. 6080 also provides funding for additional ICE agents, analysts, and support personnel. These resources will aid ICE in identifying and dismantling cross-border criminal networks. H.R. 6080 also provides for additional equipment, such as two unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and forward operating bases for CBP. Communications in remote areas along the border is a persistent problem, and the bill helps address this problem by including funding for enhanced tactical communications in the area. Providing additional resources is not a panacea for our border security problems, however. In the absence of a comprehensive border security strategy, this kind of supplemental funding will only do so much. Rather than a piecemeal approach, the Department of Homeland Security must develop and implement a border security strategy that contemplates all border security threats facing our Nation and allocates our border security resources accordingly. Again, Madam Speaker, I support H.R. 6080 and urge my colleagues to do so as well. Mr. REYES. Madam Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the revised Emergency Border Security Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2010. While this legislation represents a scaled-down version of bill that the House has twice passed--once in the overall FY10 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations bill and again in the Emergency Border Security Supplemental bill by voice vote on July 28--the bill still provides some of the resources necessary to address the emergency at our southwest border. Because of House leadership on this issue, our colleagues in the Senate responded with a $600 million package to secure our nation's borders. Now, we must respond in kind. The challenges our communities face each and every day along the border are an emergency, and we need to do all we can to ensure the safety and security of our 2,000-mile long border with Mexico. While the Senate version of the bill provides $100 million fewer resources for the border and fewer CBP officers for land ports of entry than many of us who represent border districts would have liked, these funds will still address urgent needs on our southwest border. I ask my colleagues to seriously consider the importance of giving our law enforcement officers who are working along the border the resources they need to enhance our border security. In particular, the 250 additional Customs and Border Patrol Officers are needed because GAO estimates that we need thousands more officers in order to fully staff our ports of entry. The 250 increase is a step in the right direction. Increasing staffing of our CBP Officers at land ports of entry is critical both to expedite the flow of trade and commerce and more effectively screen out illicit drugs, weapons, human smugglers, and any other potential criminals. It would also give us greater ability to conduct southbound checks so that we can also curb the supply of arms, illegal narcotics and cash going into Mexico and fueling violence there. Residents in our border states know this is an emergency because they live it each and every day. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to act today to secure our borders by voting in favor of the Emergency Border Security Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2010. Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6080, which will provide $600 million to bolster ongoing security efforts and to reduce violence along our nation's southern border. Like many of my constituents, I am concerned about the influx of illegal immigrants into America. The level of violence stemming from the drug trade in Mexico, which has spilled over into the Southwest, is unacceptable. The Obama administration has committed more than 17,000 border patrol agents to the southern border, a historic high, yet we must do more. The bill will provide $176 million for 1,000 additional Border Patrol agents to be deployed along the southwest border and $68 million to hire 250 new Customs and Border Protection officers at ports of entry along the border. It also will fund two new unmanned aerial vehicles for Customs and Border Protection to monitor the border. The bill will provide $80 million for Immigration and Customs Enforcement to hire more than 250 special agents, investigators, intelligence analysts, and mission support staff to investigate and reduce narcotics smuggling and associated violence. Additional funding will go to the U.S. Marshals Service, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms' Project Gunrunner, the Drug Enforcement Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and to the Federal government's efforts to incarcerate criminal illegal immigrants and to reduce the backlog in the nation's immigration courts. Importantly, this bill is fully paid for by increasing fees for visas that permit foreign workers to work in the United States and by reallocating $100 million of unspent funds at the Department of Homeland Security. These fee increases would apply only to companies with more than 50 employees with a workforce predominantly comprised of visa-holding foreign workers. The history of America is a history of immigration and of immigrants. From the first settlers in Jamestown and Plymouth to the masses greeted by the Statue of Liberty and Ellis Island fleeing poverty and persecution in the old world, millions have sought a new life in America. Immigrants continue to this day to be a vital part of our social fabric and a key contributor to economic growth. While Congress needs to address immigration reform in a comprehensive manner, our first priority must be securing our borders by providing additional tools and resources to those who patrol the border. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill. Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 6080. [[Page 15430]] The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill was passed. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. ____________________