IT IS WRONG.
THIS IS INDEED THE RIGHT  
APPROACH TO TAKE ON THIS  
PARTICULAR -- ON THIS 
PARTICULAR PROBLEM. 
I YIELD BACK, MADAM CHAIRMAN. 
 THE GENTLEMAN -- 
 MAY I INQUIRE HOW 
MUCH TIME I HAVE LEFT?
 YOU HAVE ONE MINUTE  
AND 30 SECONDS. 
 I'LL GIVE YOU 30  
SECONDS.
 I'D LIKE TO CALL THE 
GENTLEMAN'S ATTENTION TO  
SECTION D ON PAGE 90 AND ASK  
FOR HIS ASSESSMENT OF THIS, WE  
WORKED IT OUT CAREFULLY WITH  
THE CHAIRMAN IN A COOPERATIVE 
WAY AND IT ADDRESSES DIRECTLY 
THE QUESTION OF ACCOUNTABILITY, 
THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR,  
IN CONSULTATION WITH THE  
SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY  
SHALL SUBMIT TO THE COMMITTEE 
ON APPROPRIATIONS NOT LATER 
THAN 15 DAYS BEFORE ANY 
PROPOSED TRANSFER UNDER THIS  
SECTION AN EXPENDITURE PLAN 
THAT DESCRIBES IN DETAIL THE  
ACTIONS PROPOSED TO BE TAKEN  
WITH THE AMOUNT TRANSFERRED.
DOES THAT NOT MEET THE  
STANDARDS OF ACCOUNTABILITY?
THE GENTLEMAN'S TIME HAS 
EXPIRED.
 IT SOUNDS GOOD ON 
PAPER BUT IT DUVENT WORK IN 
REALITY.
THE MITIGATION MONEY IS NOT 
GOING TO THE AREA WHERE THE 
MITIGATION THESE TO BE DONE.
IF YOU CARE ABOUT THAT  
ENVIRONMENT AND WANT TO SOLVE 
THE MITIGATION EFFORT, BUT THE  
-- PUT THE MONEY INTO THE 
BORDER PATROL, NOT INTO THE 
SLUSH FUND TO MOVE MONEY FROM 
HOMELAND SECURITY INTO INTERIOR 
50
00:01:29,000 --> 00:01:28,999
FOR THE ACQUISITION OF LAND AND 
PROPERTY. 
IT IS UNREALISTIC.
 THE GENTLEMAN FROM 
UTAH'S TIME HAS EXPIRED.
ANY OBJECTION.
THE GENTLEMAN -- WITHOUT  
OBJECTION, THE GENTLEMAN FROM 
UTAH. 
 YOU'VE GOT 30 
SECONDS, GO FOR IT. 
 HERE'S WHAT WE 
SHOULD DO.
DO BOTH.
STOP ALL THE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS 
COMING ACROSS --  
 STOP ALL THE ILLEGAL 
IMMIGRANTS COMING ACROSS, BUT 
ALSO DO THE MITIGATION TO 
PROTECT THE SPECIES IN THAT 
PART OF THE COUNTRY.
WE CAN DO THEM BOTH.
WE DON'T HAVE TO BE LIMITED TO  
ONE OR ANOTHER. 
THE GENTLEMAN RAISES A FALSE  
CHOICE. 
 IF I COULD CLAIM  
BACK MY LAST 30 SECONDS, I'LL 
DO THIS AS QUICKLY AS I CAN 
THAT SHOULD BE THE ROLE OF THE  
INTOOROR APPROPRIATION BECAUSE  
THERE'S NO OVERSIGHT THAT TAKES 
PLACE HERE. 
WE HAVE ALREADY BEEN BERATED ON 
HOW LITTLE WE ARE SPENDING ON 
HOMELAND SECURITY.
SPEND HOMELAND SECURITY MONEY 
ON HOMELAND SECURITY DO NOT 
CREATE A SLUSH FUND WE HAVE 
CREATED IN THE PAST SO MONEY  
GOES TO INTERIOR. 
IF YOU WANT TO DO IT, GO TO 
INTERIOR WHERE THE MONEY SHOULD 
BE SPENT IN THE FIRST PLACE AND 
DO IT THE RIGHT WAY.
APPARENTLY I'M YIELDING BACK MY 
TIME. 
 THE GENTLEMAN'S TIME 
HAS EXPIRED.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE QUELT 
FROM ALABAMA RISE?
101
00:03:02,000 --> 00:03:01,999
GENTLELADY. 
I WANT TO THANK THE  
 DOES THE GENTLEMAN 
MOVE TO STRIKE THE LAST WORD? 
 I MOVE TO STRIKE  
THE LAST WORD.
 THE GENTLEMAN IS 
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
 I WANT TO THANK 
THE GENTLELADY FOR WORKING WITH 
US AND I APPRECIATE THE 
CONCERNS SHE HAS RAISED AND 
ALSO THAT THE GENTLEMAN FROM  
UTAH HAS RAISED.
THE COMMITTEE HAS ATTEMPTED TO  
ADDRESS BOTH TO ADDRESS BOTH  
REQUESTS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF 
HOMELAND SECURITY AND THE 
INTEREST OF THE NUMBER OF 
MEMBERS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE  
AISLE AND DRAFTING SECTION 547. 
IT WAS NARROWLY TAILORED TO 
ADDRESS ONLY THE MOST NARROW  
ENVIRONMENTAL SECURITIES  
RELATED TO BORDER SECURITY AND  
MAINTENANCE.
IT INCLUDED STRICT CONTROLS ON  
THE TRANSFER OF FUNDS FROM THE  
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 
TO THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR.
ONLY WHERE THE SECRETARY OF 
HOMELAND SECURITY CERTIFIES THE 
TRANSFER IS ABSOLUTELY  
NECESSARY FOR BORDER SECURITY 
AND THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF  
HOMELAND SECURITY DOES NOT HAVE 
THE AUTHORITY TO CARRY OUT THE  
NECESSARY ACTIVITY. 
FURTHER, THE SECRETARY OF 
INTERIOR MUST PROVIDE A 
DETAILED PLAN WITH ADVANCED 
NOTIFICATION, ALLOWING THE  
ECONOMY TO REJECTION THE PLAN.
THE COMMITTEE'S INTEREST WAS A  
BORDER SECURITY, UNFORTUNATELY, 
WE'RE NOT ABLE TO BALANCE THE 
VIEWS AND VIEWPOINTS AND  
CONCERNS TO FIND A COMPROMISE 
IN THIS PROCESS.
FOR THAT REASON, I SUPPORT THE  
LUMMIS AMENDMENT AND I YIELD  
BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.
 THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS 
BACK. 
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE 
GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS RISE?
I MOVE TO STRIKE THE LAST  
WORD. 
 THE GENTLEMAN IS 
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.
FEDERAL PUBLIC LANDS -- 
 FEDERAL PUBLIC LANDS 
HAVE BECOME THE CHOSEN PATH FOR 
DRUG SMUGGLERS AND ILLEGALS 
ENTERING THE UNITED STATES OF 
AMERICA.
THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY 
OFFICE HAS CONFIRMED THAT 
CERTAIN ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS SUCH 
AS THE WILDERNESS ACT AND 
ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT LIMIT  
PATROL'S ACCESS AND  
EXPOSE GREAT AREAS OF THE 
BORDER TO SIGNIFICANT 
ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE DUE TOIL 
LEGAL TRAFFIC COMING INTO THE 
UNITED STATES.
IN CERTAIN AREAS, BORDER PATROL 
AGENTS ARE LIMITED TO PALE  
TOING ON FOOT OR HORSEBACK, 
EVEN IF THE DRUG RUNNERS HAVE 
A.T.V.'S, FOUR BY FOUR TRUCKS 
OR EVEN HUMVEES.
A RECENT G.A.O. REPORT REREELED 
THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR IS 
TAKING MONTHS TO APPROVE SIMPLE 
PERMITS THAT ARE NECESSARY FOR  
THE BORDER PATROL TO DO ITS 
JOB, PROTECT THE BORDER.
THE G.A.O. REPORT REVEALED THAT 
SOME PERMITS ARE NEVER GRANTED  
AT ALL. 
WHEN PERMITS ARE GIVEN TO THE 
BORDER PATROL FOR SUCH THINGS 
AS PLACING MONITOR EQUIPMENT, 
THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR  
NEGOTIATES MITIGATION PACKAGES  
WITH THE BORDER PATROL. 
BUT THESE ARE FORCING THE 
BORDER PATROL TO FORK OVER  
MONEY FOR ENVIRONMENTAL 
ACTIVITIES. 
THE OBVIOUSLY IS BEING MISSED 
BY THE DEPARTMENT OF ENTIRE --  
THE OBVIOUS IS BEING MISSED BY  
THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR, 
THAT THE ILLEGAL ACTIVITY 
ITSELF DESTROYS THE ENVIRONMENT 
THEY'RE TRYING TO PRESERVE. 
I RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF THE 
LUMMIS AMENDMENT. 
I YELLED BACK THE REMAINDER OF  
MY TIME.
215
00:06:10,000 --> 00:06:09,999
 THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS 
BACK. 
THE QUESTION IS ON THE  
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE  
GENTLEWOMAN FROM WYOMING. 
THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR,  
THE AYES HAVE IT. 
MADAM CHAIR, I ASK FOR A 
ROLL CALL VOTE. 
 PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 6 
OF RULE 18, FURTHER PROCEEDINGS 
ON THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE 
229
00:06:37,000 --> 00:06:36,999
. 
230
00:06:37,000 --> 00:06:36,999
BE POSTPONED. 
GENTLEWOMAN FROM WYOMING WILL 
THE CLERK WILL READ.
 SECTION 548, OF 
THE FUNDS TRANSFERRED TO THE  
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND  
SECURITY, THE FOLLOWING FUNDS 
ARE RESCINDED FROM THE  
FOLLOWING PROGRAMS IN THE 
SPECIFIED AMOUNTS, $20,997,225  
FROM THE U.S. IMMIGRATION AND 
CUSTOMS SALARIES AND EXPENSES.
TWO, $5494,945,000 FROM VIOLENT 
CRIME REDUCTION PROGRAMS. 
SECTION 549, UNOBLIGATED  
BALANCES AVAILABLE FOR HOMELAND 
SECURITY, IMMIGRATION, AND  
ENFORCEMENT CONSTRUCTION, 
$11,300,000 IS RESCINDED. 
 FOR WHAT PURPOSE 
DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM 
LOUISIANA RISE? 
THE GENTLEMAN FROM ALABAMA? 
 I RESERVE A POINT 
OF ORDER ON THE GENTLEMAN'S 
AMENDMENT.
 WE'LL LET THE  
GENTLEMAN FIRST OFFER THE 
AMENDMENT.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE 
GENTLEMAN FROM LOUISIANA RISE?
I HAVE AN AMENDMENT AT THE 
DESK, MADAM CHAIR.
 DID THE GENTLEMAN  
264
00:07:55,000 --> 00:07:54,999
AMENDMENT?
SUBMIT THE TEXT OF THE  
YES.
 THE CLERK WILL READ. 
 AMENDMENT OFFERED BY 
MR. RICHMOND OF LOUISIANA.
AT THE END OF THE BILL BEFORE 
THE SHORT TITLE, INSERT THE 
FOLLOWING.
 THE GENTLEMAN FROM 
ALABAMA RECOGNIZED. 
 I RESERVE A POINT 
OF ORDER ON THE GENTLEMAN'S 
AMENDMENT.
 THE GENTLEMAN WILL 
SUSPEND.
THE CLERK WILL DESIGNATE THE  
OTHER RICHMOND AMENDMENT. 
 AMENDMENT OFFERED BY 
MR. RICHMOND OF LOUISIANA, PAGE 
91, AFTER LINE 10, INSERT THE 
FOLLOWING, SECTION A, IN THIS 
SECTION, THE TERM COVERED 
ASSISTANCE MEANS ASSISTANCE 
PROVIDED, ONE, UNDER SECTION  
408 OF THE ROBERT T. STAFFORD 
DISASTER RELIEF AND EMERGENCY 
ASSISTANCE ACT. 
MADAM CHAIR? 
 FOR WHAT PURPOSE 
DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM ALABAMA 
RISE? 
 I RESPECTFULLY  
RESERVE.
 THE POINT OF ORDER 
IS RESERVED.
THE CLERK WILL READ.
 UNITED STATES CODE 
5174, AND TWO, IN RELATION TO A 
MAJOR DISASTER DECLARED BY THE  
PRESIDENT --  
I REQUEST WE SUSPEND THE 
READING.
 IS THERE OBJECTION?
WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM LOUISIANA IS 
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
 MADAM CHAIR, WHAT 
THIS AMENDMENT WOULD DO IS  
UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE 
STAFFORD ACT AND THE DISASTER 
RELIEF AND EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE 
ACT, THERE ARE APPROXIMATE  
160,000 AMERICAN CITIZENS 
ACROSS THIS COUNTRY WHO IN THE  
AFTERMATH OF HURRICANES 
KATRINA, RITA, IKE AND GOOSE TO 
-- AND GUSTAV, RECEIVED 
BENEFITS UNDER AN ERROR UNDER 
OUR FEDERAL EMERGENCY AND 
MANAGEMENT AGENCY AND WHAT THE  
GOVERNMENT IS ATTEMPTING TO DO  
NOW ALMOST SIX YEARS LATER IS 
GO BACK AND RECOUP THOSE FUNDS  
WHICH WERE NOT GAINED BY ANY  
AMERICAN CITIZEN THROUGH FRAUD  
OR THEFT OR DECEIT, IT WAS A  
VALID APPLICATION ON THEIR PART 
IN WHICH OUR FEMA AGENCY MADE A 
MISTAKE.
AND MADAM CHAIR, JUST IN THESE  
ECONOMIC TIMES, WE AS 
GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT GO BACK 
AND PENALIZE CITIZENS 60 YEARS  
AFTER THE GOVERNMENT MADE AN  
ERROR AND GAVE THEM DISASTER  
RELIEF FUNDS IN THE AFTERMATH 
OF THE WORST NATURAL DISASTER 
WE FACED IN THIS COUNTRY'S  
HISTORY.
WHAT THIS AMENDMENT DOES IS 
SIMPLY SAYS THAT THE GOVERNMENT 
SHOULD NOT DO IT, AND THAT WE 
WILL NOT GO BACK AND TRY TO 
RECOUP FROM THE 160,000 
AMERICAN CITIZENS THAT ARE  
SPREAD OUT THROUGH TEXAS, 
THROUGH LOUISIANA, THROUGH  
ALABAMA, AND THROUGH  
MISSISSIPPI TO TRY TO RECOUP  
THOSE FUNDS.
AND THAT'S SIMPLY ALL IT DOES,  
AND I WOULD ASK WE SUPPORT IT.
 DOES THE GENTLEMAN 
YIELD BACK? 
 I YIELD BACK, 
YES.
 FOR WHAT PURPOSE 
362
00:11:15,000 --> 00:11:14,999
DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM ALABAMA 
RISE? 
 INSIST UPON A 
POINT OF ORDER. 
 THE GENTLEMAN WILL 
STATE HIS POINT OF ORDER. 
 I MAKE A POINT OF 
ORDER AGAINST THE AMENDMENT 
BECAUSE IT PROPOSES CHANGING  
EXISTING LAW AND CONSTITUTES  
LEGISLATION IN AN 
APPROPRIATIONS BILL AND 
THEREFORE VIOLATES CLAUSE 2 OF  
RULE 21.
THE RULE STATES IN PERTINENT  
PART, AN AMENDMENT TO A GENERAL 
APPROPRIATIONS BILL SHALL NOT 
BE IN ORDER IF CHANGING 
EXISTING LAW GIVES AFFIRMATIVE  
ACTION IN EFFECT. 
I ASK FOR A RULING FROM THE 
CHAIR.
 ANY OTHER MEMBER 
WISH TO BE HEARD ON THE POINT 
OF ORDER? 
IF NOT, THE CHAIR WILL RULE.
THE CHAIR FINDS THAT THIS 
AMENDMENT INCLUDES LANGUAGE 
IMPARTING DIRECTION.
THE AMENDMENT THEREFORE 
CONSTITUTES LEGISLATION IN  
VIOLATION OF CLAUSE 2 OF RULE 
21. 
THE POINT OF ORDER IS SUSTAINED 
AND THE AMENDMENT IS NOT NO 
ORDER.
THE CLERK WILL READ.
 PAGE 91, LINE 11,  
TITLE 6, EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL 
FUNDING FOR DISASTER RELIEF,  
INCLUDING RECISION AND TRANSFER 
OF FUNDS. 
SECTION 601, EFFECTIVE ON THE 
DATE OF THE ENACTMENT OF THIS 
ACT, UNOBLIGATED BALANCES 
REMAINING AVAILABLE AT THE  
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, $500  
MILLION, IS RESCINDED AND $1  
BILLION IS HEREBY TRANSFERRED 
TO DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 
SECURITY FEDERAL EMERGENCY  
MANAGEMENT AGENCY DISASTER  
RELIEF. 
TITLE 7, SPENDING REDUCTION 
ACCOUNT, SECTION 701, THE 
AMOUNT BY WHICH THE APPLICABLE  
ALLOCATION OF NEW BUDGET  
AUTHORITY MADE BY THE COMMITTEE 
ON APPROPRIATIONS UNDER SECTION 
302-B OF THE CONGRESSIONAL  
BUDGET ACT OF 1974 EXCEEDS THE  
AMOUNT PROPOSED IN THE BUDGET 
AUTHORITY IS ZERO DOLLARS.
 FOR WHAT PURPOSE 
DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS 
RISE? 
MADAM CHAIRMAN, I RISE TODAY 
429
00:13:18,000 --> 00:13:17,999
 AT THE GENTLEMAN 
TO OFFER AN AMENDMENT.
SUBMITTED THE AMENDMENT.
THE AMENDMENT HAS BEEN 
SUBMITTED.
 WOULD THE GENTLEMAN  
SPECIFY THE NUMBER OF THE 
AMENDMENT?
NUMBER ONE.
 THE CLERK WILL 
DESIGNATE.
 AMENDMENT 1 PRINTED  
IN THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD 
OFFERED BY MR. CARTER OF TEXAS. 
 THE GENTLEMAN FROM 
TEXAS IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE  
MINUTES.
 THANK YOU.
MADAM CHAIRMAN, I RISE TODAY TO 
OFFER AN AMENDMENT WHICH WOULD  
STRIP FUNDS ALLOWED TO THE  
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 
CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION TASK  
FORCE.
THE U.S. GOVERNMENT HAS NO  
SHORTAGE OF AGENCIES DEDICATED  
TO STUDYING GLOBAL CLIMATE  
CHANGE AND ITS IMPACT.
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011, THE 
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  
AGENCY, OR E.P.A., HASAL BUDGET 
OF $6.6 BILLION AND FIND PHIS 
TAKING ACTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE 
AS THE NUMBER ONE GOAL IN ITS 
F.Y. 2011-2015 STRATEGIC PLAN.
THE NATIONAL OCEANIC AND  
ATMOSPHEREIC ASSOCIATION, NOAH, 
WHICH AMONG OTHER THINGS IS 
CHARGED WITH CLIMATE MONITORING 
HAS A BUDGET OF $5.6 BILLION  
FOR F.Y. 2011.
SO I ASK SECRETARY NAPOLITANO 
WHY AT A TIME WHEN OUR NATION 
IS RUNNING A PUBLIC DEBT OF 
OVER $14 TRILLION, SHOULD THE 
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 
BE SPENDING MONEY ON A CLIMATE  
CHANGE ADAPTATION TASK FORCE? 
MILLIONS OF POUNDS OF ILLEGAL 
DRUGS ARE TRAFFICKED ACROSS OUR 
BORDER EACH YEAR. 
ON MAY 9, 12 SUSPECTED MEMBERS  
OF THE INFAMOUS ZETA DRUG 
CARTEL AND ONE MEXICAN MARINE 
WERE KILLED IN A SHOOT-OUT  
ALONG THE TEXAS-MEXICO BORDER,  
THE SAME LAKE WHERE A U.S.  
CITIZEN WAS CAUGHT AND -- SHOT  
AND KILLED BY PIRATES WHILE 
VOTING LAST SEPTEMBER.
AN UNTOLD NUMBER OF MEN AND 
WOMEN AND CHILDREN ARE  
TRAFFICKED ACROSS OUR BORDER  
FOR BOTH SEXUAL AND LABOR 
EXPLOITATION WHICH IS 
EQUIVALENT TO MODERN DAY  
SLAVERY.
ADDITIONAL INTELLIGENCE 
RECOVERED FROM OSAMA BIN  
LADEN'S COMPOUND IN ABBOTTABAD, 
PAKISTAN, REVEALED AL QAEDA WAS 
CONSIDERING LAUNCHING ATTACKS 
ON U.S. TRAINS AND SUBWAY 
STATIONS. 
LAST OCTOBER TWO PACKAGES 
CONTAINING EXPLOSIVES WERE  
SHIPPED FROM YEMEN ADDRESSED TO 
A CHICAGO AREA SYNAGOGUE AND  
THEY WERE DISCOVERED ON AN AIR  
CARGO PLANE.
A VAST NETWORK OF COMPUTERS AND 
OPERATING SYSTEMS WHICH OUR 
GOVERNMENT AND ECONOMY RELIES 
ON TO OPERATE EVERY DAY IS  
UNPROTECTED FROM ATTACKS  
ORIGINATING FROM COUNTRIES SUCH 
AS RUSSIA AND CHINA.
THESE ARE THE PRIORITIES THE  
SECRETARY SHOULD BE FOCUSING  
ON, NOT WASTING TIME  
DUPLICATING THE WORK OF THE 
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 
AND NOAA. 
THE SECRETARY'S CLIMATE CHANGE  
ADAPTATION TASK FORCE IS A  
WASTE OF TIME AND RESOURCES.
AND IT SHOULD BE -- AND THOSE 
RESOURCES SHOULD BE DEVOTED TO  
SECURING OUR BORDERS AND  
ENSURING THE SAFETY OF OUR  
HOMELAND. 
I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO SUPPORT 
THIS AMENDMENT. 
THANK YOU.
AND I YIELD BACK. 
 FOR WHAT PURPOSE 
DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM NORTH 
CAROLINA RISE?
 MADAM CHAIRMAN, I  
RISE IN OPPOSITION TO THE 
AMENDMENT AND ASK TO STRIKE THE 
LAST WORDS. 
 THE GENTLEMAN IS 
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
 MADAM CHAIRMAN, I  
WAS INTRIGUED WITH THIS 
AMENDMENT, DIDN'T QUITE 
UNDERSTAND THE IMPORT OF IT, SO 
I HAVE DONE A LITTLE RESEARCH,  
TALKED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF 
HOMELAND SECURITY ABOUT THE 
EXTENT OF THEIR ACTIVITIES WITH 
THIS TASK FORCE, AND WHAT THE 
EFFECT OF THIS AMENDMENT MIGHT  
BE. 
SO I'D LIKE TO OFFER A LITTLE 
REALITY CHECK HERE AND SUGGEST  
THAT THIS AMENDMENT IS NOT  
MERITED.
THIS AMENDMENT, FOR STARTERS, 
WILL NOT SAVE ANY MONEY AND 
SIMPLY PROHIBITS THE DEPARTMENT 
OF HOMELAND SECURITY AND ITS  
EMPLOYEES FROM IN ANY WAY 
PLANNING FOR THE EFFECTS OF 
CLIMATE CHANGE. 
NOW, THE DEBATE ISN'T ABOUT 
WHETHER OR NOT ONE BELIEVES 
THAT CLIMATE CHANGE IS BEING  
CAUSED BY HUMAN BEINGS. 
THE FACT IS THAT WHATEVER THE 
CAUSE, CLIMATE CHANGE IS  
OCCURRING IN CERTAIN PARTS OF 
THE WORLD.
BOTH THE U.S. COAST GUARD AND 
THE NAVY HAVE TESTIFIED BEFORE  
CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES THAT 
THEIR OPERATIONS ARE GREATLY  
AFFECTED, PARTICULARLY IN THE 
ARCTIC REGION.
THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND  
SECURITY HAS IDENTIFIED OTHER 
SPECIFIC CLIMATE CHANGE RELATED 
IMPACTS ON D.H.S. MISSIONS. 
THESE INCLUDE, AS YOU MIGHT 
EXPECT, DISASTER RESPONSE 
ACTIVITIES AND THE PROTECTION 
OF CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE. 
NOW, GIVEN THE HISTORIC 
FLOODING THAT'S OCCURRED ALONG  
THE MISSISSIPPI, AS WELL AS THE 
WORST TORNADO SEASON WE'VE  
EXPERIENCED SINCE 1950 WITH 
OVER 1,200 TORNADOS AND 500 
DEATHS, IT'S UNDERSTANDABLE 
THAT D.H.S. MIGHT JUST WANT THE 
BEST AVAILABLE INFORMATION ON 
CLIMATE CHANGE. 
NOW, I WANT TO CLARIFY ANY  
MISINFORMATION HERE.
THERE ARE NO D.H.S. EMPLOYEES,  
NOR ARE ANY D.H.S. FUNDS  
DEDICATED FULL TIME TO CLIMATE  
CHANGE. 
ONE PERSON AT THE DEPARTMENT  
HAS SPENT A LIMITED AMOUNT OF 
TIME REPRESENTING D.H.S. AT 
THESE TASK FORCE MEETINGS AND 
ACTIVITIES. 
ONE PERSON. 
SO PROHIBITING FUNDS GOING  
TOWARDS THIS EFFORT IS NOT  
GOING TO SAVE ANY MONEY.
BUT THERE ARE SEVERAL D.H.S.  
COMPONENTS, INCLUDING FEMA AND  
THE COAST GUARD THAT HAVE BEEN  
ABLE TO LEVERAGE  
CROSS-GOVERNMENT EXPERTISE FROM 
THE TASK FORCE ON BOTH CLIMATE  
ISSUES AND ON LONG-RANGE  
PLANNING GENERALLY. 
I WOULD THINK THAT'S EXACTLY  
WHAT THEY SHOULD DO.
SO WHAT THIS AMENDMENT WOULD  
DO, RATHER THAN SAVING ANY  
MONEY, IT WOULD SIMPLY PREVENT  
D.H.S. PERSONS FROM MEETING OR  
EVEN TALKING TO EACH OTHER  
REGARDING THE TASK FORCE. 
NOW, IT'S PRUDENT AND NECESSARY 
FOR D.H.S. TO BE ABLE TO WORK 
WITH ITS PARTNER AGENCIES TO  
PLAN FOR THE EFFECTS OF CLIMATE 
CHANGE ON THEIR MISSIONS. 
AND IT'S PROPER AND IMPORTANT 
THAT OUR GOVERNMENT AGENCIES BE 
ABLE TO TALK TO EACH OTHER  
636
00:20:00,000 --> 00:19:59,999
ABOUT THE CHANGES THEY ARE  
WITNESSING. 
AND THE ACCOMMODATIONS TO THEIR 
MISSIONS THAT MIGHT NEED TO BE  
MADE. 
SO MADAM CHAIRMAN, AGAIN, THE 
CARTER AMENDMENT WILL NOT SAVE  
ONE DOLLAR. 
INSTEAD, IT WILL PREVENT D.H.S. 
FROM ENGAGING IN CONTINGENCY  
PLANNING WITH PARTNER AGENCIES  
ACROSS GOVERNMENT.
THIS IS A DEBATE, IF IT'S ABOUT 
ANYTHING, IT'S ABOUT ENSURING 
GOOD GOVERNMENT, INTELLIGENT  
PLANNING AND RESPONSIBLE  
COORDINATION. 
I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO VOTE  
AGAINST THE AMENDMENT.
AND I YIELD THE BALANCE OF MY 
TIME. 
 FOR WHAT PURPOSE 
DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM 
WASHINGTON RISE?
 I RISE IN OPPOSITION 
TO THE AMENDMENT AND STRIKE THE 
REQUISITE NUMBER OF WORDS.
 THE GENTLEMAN FROM 
664
00:20:44,000 --> 00:20:43,999
FIVE MINUTES. 
WASHINGTON IS RECOGNIZED FOR  
 I AGAIN WANT TO  
COMPLIMENT THE RANKING MEMBER 
FOR HIS LUCID DESCRIPTION OF  
THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND  
SECURITIES' WORK ON CLIMATE 
CHANGE. 
WE HAVE HAD A WEATHER SEASON  
THAT'S BEEN EXTRAORDINARY.
WHETHER THIS IS CAUSED -- THIS  
CLIMATE CHANGE WE'RE  
EXPERIENCING IS CAUSED BY 
HUMANS OR IS -- IT'S JUST 
HAPPENING, EITHER WAY THE 
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 
SHOULD BE ENGAGED IN THE  
INTERAGENCY EFFORTS TO FIND OUT 
WHAT WE CAN DO TO MINIMIZE AND  
ADAPT TO THE CLIMATE CHANGE.
THIS AFFECTS WEATHER. 
WE'VE SEEN THE STORMS THAT HAVE 
BEEN MENTIONED, IT ALSO AFFECTS 
THE NORTHERN LATITUDES WHERE  
WE'RE SEEING THE POLAR ICE  
MELTING AND THE COAST GUARD IS  
GOING TO HAVE MORE  
RESPONSIBILITIES TO GO INTO 
THOSE AREAS BECAUSE OTHER 
COUNTRIES ARE TRYING TO EXPLOIT 
THIS. 
SO I WOULD JUST SAY TO THE  
GENTLEMAN, I MEAN, IF THERE'S 
ONLY ONE PERSON WORKING PART  
TIME ON THIS, I DON'T SEE A 
REASON TO PROHIBIT IT.
I WOULD URGE THE GENTLEMAN TO 
WITHDRAW HIS AMENDMENT. 
I YIELD.
I BELIEVE HE SAID -- 
 I BELIEVE HE SAID 
IT HAD GONE TO THE TASK FORCE 
INCLUDING FEMA AND THE TASK 
FORCE, IS THAT WHAT YOU SAID? 
YES. 
 AREN'T FEMA AND THE 
COAST GUARD PART OF THE 
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND  
SECURITY? 
IF IT'S SO NEGLIGIBLE AND OF NO 
CONSEQUENCE, WHY -- I DON'T 
UNDERSTAND WHY YOU WON'T ACCEPT 
THE AMENDMENT?
 IT WOULD BAR THE 
DEPARTMENT FROM DISCUSSING IT 
WITH ANYBODY. 
IT'S SO SHORTSIGHTED. 
THIS IS A NATIONAL SECURITY 
ISSUE.
THE NAVY IS NOW LOOKING AT THE  
COASTAL AREAS AS THE SEAS RISE, 
IT'S GOING TO AFINGT NAVY 
INSTALLATIONS ALL OVER THE  
COUNTRY.
I BRUGGET IN THE PARK SERVICE 
WHEN I WAS CHAIRMAN OF THE  
INTERIOR, THE FISH AND WILDLIFE 
SERVICE, THEY ALL SEE THE 
AFFECTS.
WE'VE GOT A LONGER FIRE SEASON. 
THIS IS SOMETHING YOU CAN'T 
IGNORE. 
THIS IS A NATIONAL ISSUE THAT 
IS SIGNIFICANT AND -- THE 
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 
THAT ISN'T GOING TO LOOK AT THE 
CONSEQUENCES OF CLIMATE CHANGE  
AFTER WHAT WE'VE SEEN THIS YEAR 
IS JUST RIDICULOUS ON THE FACE  
OF IT.
 IF THE GENTLEMAN  
WILL YIELD. 
 I YIELD. 
 I DO NOT ASK THAT 
THE DEPARTMENT NOT LOOK INTO  
CLIMATE CHANGE. 
SKI THAT WE TAKE ANY FUNDS  
ALLOCATED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF  
HOMELAND SECURITY'S CLIMATE 
CHANGE ADAPTATION TASK FORCE, 
THERE IS -- IF THERE IS NO SUCH 
TASK FORCE -- I BELIEVE THERE 
IS, BUT IF THERE IS NONE, THERE 
IS NONE.
I KNOW TWO AGENCIES THAT ARE  
CLOSE TO $15 BILLION THAT ARE 
IN CLY HAT CHANGE.
YOU NAMED THE NAVY AND OTHER  
AGENCIES LOOKING INTO IT. 
THEY ARE ALL GETTING MONEY, WHY 
764
00:24:15,000 --> 00:24:14,999
CAN'T WE GET INFORMATION FROM 
THOSE PEOPLE? 
WHY DO WE HAVE TO GO AND SPEND  
MONEY WE DESPERATELY NEED ON  
OUR BORDERS TO PROTECT  
OURSELVES FROM THE REAL 
TERRIBLE VIOLENCE THAT'S  
SLAUGHTERING PEOPLE ON THE  
MEXICAN BOARD HER WHY DO WE 
HAVE TO SPEND MONEY ON  
SOMETHING THAT -- YOU CAN NAME  
FIVE DIFFERENT GROUPS STUDYING  
IT AND I NAMED TWO ADDITIONAL.
 WHY CAN'T HOMELAND 
SECURITY WITH THE COAST GUARD 
AND FEMA AND ALL THESE  
ORGANIZATIONS BE PART OF THE  
INTERAGENCY EFFORT? 
THEY'RE NOT WASTING MONEY ON  
THIS. 
THIS IS IMPORTANT RESEARCH. 
WILL THE GENTLEMAN YIELD?
 I YIELD. 
IS IT ACTUALLY LESS  
EFFICIENT TO SHUT OFF THIS KIND 
OF INTERAGENCY DISCUSSION, SAY  
THE REPRESENTATIVE FROM FEMA OR 
THE COAST GUARD CAN'T 
PARTICIPATE, THEY HAVE TO 
REINVENT THE WHEEL? 
 I DON'T UNDERSTAND 
THE RATIONALE FOR SAYING WHEN 
INTERAGENCY WORK IS GOING ON  
THAT HAS THE POTENTIAL TO 
INFORM HOMELAND SECURITY'S WORK 
WHY THEY SHOULDN'T TAKE 
ADVANTAGE OF THAT?
 I DON'T HAVE ANY  
TIME. 
 FEMA RESPOPPEDS TO 
WEATHER DISASTERS.
THEY'VE GOT TO BE INVOLVED IN 
THE TASK FORCE LOOKING AT 
CLIMATE CHANGE. 
IT'S JUST -- I MEAN -- I JUST 
CAN'T BELIEVE THAT NO ONE WANTS 
TO DO THIS. 
 IF THE GENTLEMAN  
WILL YIELD, IT'S THE WEATHER  
BUREAU. 
THAT'S THE WEATHER FOLKS  
STUDYING THIS THING.
THEY'VE GOT $5.6 BILLION TO 
STUDY IT. 
I'M NOT ASKING FOR THE WORLD. 
I'M JUST SAY, WHY DON'T WE -- 
WE ALSO, LAST TIME YOU WERE IN  
CHARGE, TOOK A SPY SATELLITE OR 
TWO, TOOK THEM OUT OF 
AFGHANISTAN AND PUT THEM OVER 
THE POLES TO STUDY THE POLES. 
 THE GENTLEMAN'S TIME 
HAS EXPIRED.
 THE GENTLEMAN HAS  
ABOUT EXPIRED, TOO. 
THANK YOU.
 THE QUESTION IS ON 
THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE  
GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS. 
THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR,  
THE AYES HAVE IT. 
I ASK FOR A ROLL CALL. 
 PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 6 
OF RULE 18, FURTHER PROCEEDINGS 
ON THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE 
GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS WILL BE  
POSTPONED.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE 
GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS RISE?
MADAM CHAIR, I HAVE AN 
AMENDMENT AT THE DESK, MARKED 
NUMBER 9. 
 THE CLERK WILL READ. 
 AMENDMENT NUMBER 9 
PRINTED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL  
RECORD, OFFERED BY MR. POE OF 
TEXAS.
 THE GENTLEMAN IS 
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM -- THE  
GENTLEMAN FROM ALABAMA IS 
RECOGNIZED. 
 I RESERVE A POINT 
OF ORDER. 
 THE POINT OF ORDER 
IS RESERVED.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS IS 
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
 THANK YOU, MADAM 
CHAIR.
IT'S RECENTLY COME TO LIGHT 
THAT ACCORDING TO THE U.S.  
CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION 
SERVICES, THE DEPARTMENT OF 
HOMELAND SECURITY GRANTED 
DEFERRED ACTION TO OVER 12,000  
ILLEGAL ALIENS IN F.Y. 2010.
DEFERRED ACTION IS A TECHNICAL  
TERM WHICH MEANS THAT A PERSON  
IS SUBJECT TO DEPORTATION BUT 
OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, THE 
ADMINISTRATION, DECIDES NOT TO  
DEPORT THEM AT ALL, CALLING IT  
DEFERRED ACTION.
THIS NUMBER IS A DRAMATIC 
INCREASE FROM PREVIOUS YEARS. 
IT'S MUCH HIGHER THAN THE LESS  
THAN 900 NUMBER THAT WAS  
RECENTLY QUOTED BY SECRETARY  
NAPOLITANO IN TESTIMONY IN A  
SENATE JUDICIARY HEARING. 
THESE NUMBERS ALSO SEEM TO BE 
DRASTICALLY -- OR THEY  
DRASTICALLY CONTRADICTION 
STATEMENTS BY THE 
ADMINISTRATION THAT DEFERRED  
ACTION WOULD NOT BE USED TO 
PROVIDE BACK DOOR AMNESTY TO  
ILLEGAL AIL GENERALS. 
IN SHORT, IT'S PART OF  
PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION, AND 
THAT DISCRETION IS NOT TO 
PURSUE REMOVAL FROM THE UNITED  
STATES OF A SPECIFIC INDIVIDUAL 
FOR A PERIOD OF TIME. 
IT IS ONLY INTENDED TO BE USED  
IN SPECIAL OCCASIONS BUT NOW  
OVER 12,000 PEOPLE A YEAR ARE 
GIVEN THIS DEFERRED ACTIONFUL 
OUR BROKEN IMMIGRATION SYSTEM 
IN THIS COUNTRY CONTINUES TO  
ALLOW HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF  
ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS IN EACH  
YEAR. 
INCREASINGLY, DEFERRED ACTION 
IS BEING USED AS AN EASY WAY  
FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO 
AVOID ENFORCING THE LAW FOR 
PEOPLE THAT ARE ARRESTED AND  
CAUGHT IN THE UNITED STATES 
ILLEGALLY.
QUITE SIMPLY IT IS ILLEGAL TO 
BE IN THIS COUNTRY WITHOUT  
PERMISSION AND IT IS THE  
RESPONSIBILITY OF THE FEDERAL 
GOVERNMENT TO EBB FORE--  
ENFORCE THE IMMIGRATION LAWS OF 
THIS CLINT AT ALL TIMES, NOT TO 
PICK AND CHOOSE WHEN TO ENFORCE 
CERTAIN LAWS, ESPECIALLY  
IMMIGRATION LAWS. 
THIS AMENDMENT STATES THAT NO 
MONEY FROM THIS BILL MAY BE 
USED TO GRANT DEFERRED ACTION 
OR PAROLE TO ANY PERSON IN THE  
UNITED STATES FOR ANY REASON  
THAN A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS FOR 
TWO REASONS, ONE, URGENT  
HUMANITARIAN REASONS, OR, 
SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC BENEFIT. 
THIS PREVENTS THE 
937
00:29:48,000 --> 00:29:47,999
ADMINISTRATION FROM GOING ARN 
CORNING AN THE WILL OF THE  
AMERICAN PEOPLE BY GRANTING 
ADMINISTRATIVE AMNESTY CALLED 
DEFERRED ACTION.
942
00:29:56,000 --> 00:29:55,999
I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY  
TIME. 
 WOULD THE JELLED --  
945
00:30:01,000 --> 00:30:00,999
 WOULD  
--  
WOULD THE GENTLEMAN YIELD? 
 THE GENTLEMAN FROM 
ALABAMA IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE  
MINUTES.
951
00:30:11,000 --> 00:30:10,999
 WE WOULD LIKE TO  
CLARIFY WHICH AMENDMENT IS  
BEING CONSIDERED. 
 AMENDMENT NUMBER 9.
 I ASK UNANIMOUS 
CONSENT THAT THE CLERK READ THE 
AMENDMENT.
 WITHOUT OBJECTION, 
THE CLERK WILL REPORT THE 
AMENDMENTFUL  
 AT THE END OF THE  
BILL, BEFORE THE SHORT TITLE, 
INSERT THE FOLLOWING, SECTION,  
NONE OF THE FUNDS MADE  
AVAILABLE BY THIS ACT MAY BE  
USED TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE TO A 
STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT 
ENTITY OR OFFICIAL THAT IS IN 
VIOLATION OF SECTION 642-A OF 
THE ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION REFORM  
AND IMMIGRANT RESPONSIBILITY  
ACT OF 1996, 8 UNITED STATES  
CODE 1373-A.
 THE GENTLEMAN FROM 
INTEAM RECOGNIZED.
 I RESERVE MY  
POINT OF ORDER. 
 THE GENTLEMAN WILL 
STATE HIS POINT OF ORDER. 
 I MAKE A POINT OF 
ORDER AGAINST THE AMENDMENT 
BECAUSE IT VIOLATES RULE 21.
IT STATES THAT AN AMENDMENT 
SHALL NOT BE IN ORDER IF  
CHANGING ADDITIONAL LAW AND 
IMPOSING ADDITIONAL DUTIES AND  
I ASK FOR A RULING FROM THE 
988
00:31:27,000 --> 00:31:26,999
 DOES ANY OTHER 
CHAIR.
MEMBER WISH TO BE HEARD ON THE  
POINT OF ORDER? 
I WISH TO BE HEARD.
 THE GENTLEMAN FROM 
TEXAS IS RECOGNIZED.
 THIS IS THE AMENDMENT  
I MENTIONED TO THE MAJORITY I 
WAS GOING TO INTRODUCE AT THIS  
TIME. 
IT IS IN ORDER, IT IS NUMBER 9  
WHICH WAS STATED TO ME BY THE 
CLERK AS NUMBER 9.
SO IT IS IN ORDER.
 THE CLERK HAS READ 
AMENDMENT NUMBER 9 AND THE  
CHAIR WILL RULE ON AMENDMENT  
NUMBER 9. 
THE CHAIR FINDS THAT THIS 
AMENDMENT INCLUDES LANGUAGE 
IMPARTING DIRECTION.
THE AMENDMENT THEREFORE 
CONSTITUTES LEGISLATION IN  
VIOLATION OF CLAUSE 2 OF RULE 
21, THE POINT OF ORDER IS 
SUSTAINED AND THE AMENDMENT IS  
NOT IN ORDER. 
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE 
GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS RISE?
 I HAVE AN AMENDMENT AT 
THE DESK. 
 THE GENTLEMAN WILL 
SPECIFY THE NUMBER OF THE 
AMENDMENT.
 THE TITLE IS SANCTUARY 
CITIES AMENDMENT, I HAVE IT AS  
NUMBER 10.
 THE CLERK WILL 
REPORT AMENDMENT NUMBER 10. 
 AMENDMENT NUMBER 10  
PRINTED IN THE CONGRESSIONAL  
RECORD OFFERED BY MR. POE OF  
TEXAS.
 THE GENTLEMAN FROM 
TEXAS IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE  
MINUTES.
 I'D LIKE THE AMENDMENT 
READ. 
 WITHOUT OBJECTION, 
THE CLERK WILL READ THE 
AMENDMENT.
 AT THE ENOF THE  
BILL, BEFORE THE SHORT TITLE, 
INSERT THE FOLLOWING, SECTION,  
NONE OF THE FUNDS MADE  
AVAILABLE BY THIS ACT MAY BE  
USED IN CONTRAVENTION OF  
SECTION 642-A OF THE ILLEGAL  
IMMIGRATION REFORM ACT OF 1996, 
8 UNITED STATES CODE 1373-A.
 THE GENTLEMAN FROM 
TEXAS IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE  
MINUTES.
 THANK YOU, MADAM 
CHAIR.
OVER THE PAST YEARS, THE NUMBER 
OF AIL YEPS WHO UNLAWFULLY  
RESIDE IN THE UNITED STATES HAS 
GROUP SIGNIFICANTLY FROM AN 
ESTIMATED THREE MILLION TO 1986 
TO ABOUT 11 MILLION TO 2005 AN  
SOME PUT THOSE ESTIMATES TODAY  
AT 2010 AT 20 MILLION.
IT IS ESTIMATED THAT 400,000  
ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS ENTERED OUR  
COUNTRY LAST YEAR.
EVEN MODEST ESTIMATES WITH THE  
COST OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION TO  
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AT OVER  
$29 BILLION.
THAT'S ROUGHLY THE ANNUAL 
BUDGET FOR THE ENTIRE 
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE.
WE CANNOT AFFORD TO HAVE THIS 
CONTINUE. 
SOME JURISDICTIONS HAVE 
ASSISTED FEDERAL AUTHORITIES IN 
APPREHENDING AND DETAINING  
VIOLATORS.
UNDER THIS, STATE AND LOCAL 
AGENCIES CAN CARRY OUT VARIOUS  
FUNCTIONS.
I COMMEND THESE JURES DICKS.
HOWEVER THERE ARE SOME  
JURISDICTIONS THAT CONTINUE TO  
MANDATE THAT THEIR EMPLOYEES  
NOT COMMUNICATE WITH I.C.E. 
WHEN THEY COME ACROSS SOMEONE 
IN THE COUNTRY ILLEGALLY. 
THESE JURES DICKS ARE KNOWN AS  
SANCTUARY CITIES AND ARE  
LOCATED THROUGHOUT THE -- 
THROUGHOUT THE UNITED STATES. 
IT IS IN VIOLATION OF CURRENT 
LAW, 8 U.S.C. 1373. 
HOWEVER, DESPITE THE LAW, MANY  
CITIES AND LOCALITIES STILL 
PLACE THE RESICS ON LAW 
ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS AND OTHER  
EMPLOYEES.
8 U.S.C. 1373 STATES, AND I 
QUOTE, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY  
OTHER PROVISION OF FEDERAL, 
STATE OR LOCAL LAW, A FEDERAL,  
STATE, OR LOCAL ENTITY OR 
OFFICIAL MAY NOT PROHIBIT OR IN 
MY WAY RESTRICTION ANY  
GOVERNMENT ENTITY OR OFFICIAL 
FROM SENDING TO OR RECEIVING  
FROM THE IMMIGRATION AND  
NATURALIZATION SERVICE NOW  
CALLED I.C.E. INFORMATION 
REGARDING THIS CITIZENSHIP OR 
IMMIGRATION STATUS, LAWFUL OR 
UNLAWFUL, OF ANY INDIVIDUAL.
ONCE AGAIN, MADAM CHAIR, THIS 
IS CURRENT U.S. FEDERAL LAW.
THIS AMENDMENT IS SIMPLE. 
IT SAYS THAT NO FUNDS FROM THIS 
ACT CAN BE USED TO  
CONTRADICTION U.S. LAW WHICH I  
JUST READ.
THIS AMENDMENT SHOULD PASS  
UNANIMOUSLY BECAUSE IT'S INTENS 
THE LAW FOR CITIES AND OTHER  
JURES DICKS.
IT WILL PREVENT EMPLOYEES FROM  
SHARING INFORMATION WITH I.C.E. 
THIS AMENDMENT IS SAYING THAT 
NO MONEY WILL SUPPORT AN  
ALREADY ILLEGAL ACTIVITY. 
IT'S A COMMON SENSE AMENDMENT 
1131
00:36:11,000 --> 00:36:10,999
AND I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF 
MY TIME.
 THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS 
1134
00:36:13,000 --> 00:36:12,999
. 
BACK. 
 I APPRECIATE THE  
GENTLEMAN'S CONCERNS AND -- 
 DOES THE GENTLEMAN 
STRIKE THE LAST WORD? 
1140
00:36:28,000 --> 00:36:27,999
 I STRIKE THE LAST 
WORDS.
THIS AMENDMENT SUPPORTS 
EXISTING LAW AND WE ACCEPT THIS 
AMENDMENT.
 THE GENTLEMAN FROM 
YIELDS BACK?
DOES ANY OTHER MEMBER WISH TO 
BE HEARD? 
THE QUESTION IS ON THE  
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE  
GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS. 
THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR,  
THE AYES HAVE IT. 
THE AMENDMENT IS AGREED TO. 
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE 
GENTLEMAN FROM LOUISIANA RISE?
 MADAM CHAIR, I  
HAVE AN AMENDMENT AT THE DESK.
 THE CLERK WILL 
REPORT THE AMENDMENT. 
 AMENDMENT OFFERED BY 
MR. RICHMOND OF LOUISIANA.
AT THE END OF THE BILL BEFORE 
THE SHORT TITLE, INSERT THE 
FOLLOWING --
 I ASK WE DISPENSE 
WITH THE READING. 
 IS THERE OBJECTION?
 MADAM CHAIR.
 THE GENTLEMAN IS 
RECOGNIZED. 
 I RESERVE A POINT 
OF ORDER ON THE GENTLEMAN'S 
AMENDMENT.
 THE POINT OF ORDER 
IS OBSERVED.
WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE READING  
OF THE AMENDMENT IS SUSPENDED.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM LOUISIANA IS 
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
 MADAM CHAIR AND 
TO MY COLLEAGUES ON THE OTHER 
SIDE OF THE AISLE AND ON THE  
SAME SIDE OF THE AISLE AS I AM, 
I RISE TODAY TO DO TWO THINGS.
ONE IS TO THANK THE AMERICAN  
PEOPLE, THANK CONGRESS, AND 
THANK TWO PRESIDENTS FOR THE  
ASSISTANCE THEY GAVE TO THE 
GULF COAST AFTER HURRICANES 
KATRINA AND RITA AND EVEN AFTER 
THE B.P. OIL SPILL. 
BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I RISE  
BECAUSE JUST IN THE LAST TWO  
MONTHS, PRESIDENT OBAMA HAS 
ISSUED 27 DISASTER AND  
EMERGENCY DECLARATIONS ACROSS 
18 STATES, AND THE FACT THAT  
THIS CONGRESS AND THE LAST  
CONGRESS WAS ABLE TO HELP THE 
CITIZENS OF THE GULF COAST GAVE 
GREAT COMFORT TO AMERICANS TO 
KNOW THAT THIS GOVERNMENT WOULD 
NOT LET THEM FEND FOR 
THEMSELVES WHEN A NATURAL 
DISASTER HITS.
HOWEVER, UNDER THE POLICIES OF  
THIS CONGRESS, WE'VE DECIDED  
THAT ANY DISASTER ASSISTANCE  
WOULD REQUIRE A PAY-FORWARD AND 
THAT WOULD LEAVE A LARGE NUMBER 
OF OUR AMERICAN TAXPAYER  
CITIZENS OUT TO FEND FOR  
THEMSELVES WHEN THEY SIMPLY 
CAN'T DO IT.
SO WHEN WE LOOK AT THE TORNADOS 
AND WE LOOK AT THE FLOODING 
THAT'S OCCURRED IN THE LAST TWO 
MONTHS AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT  
STATES LIKE MINNESOTA,  
TENNESSEE, ARKANSAS, GEORGIA, 
MISSOURI, MISSISSIPPI,  
LOUISIANA, I THINK IT SHOULD BE 
THE POLICY OF THIS BODY THAT  
WE'RE GOING TO BE WHEREVER OUR  
CITIZENS NEED US. 
AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE FUND 
WHICH FEMA USES TO PAY FOR  
DISASTER RESPONSE, RECOVERY AND 
MITIGATION PROJECTS, IT'S 
1233
00:39:17,000 --> 00:39:16,999
FACING A $1 BILLION SHORTFALL 
THIS FISCAL YEAR. 
AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE ENTIRE 
WHOLE, IT'S MUCH BIGGER.
YOU'RE TALKING AT LEAST A $3  
BILLION HOLE FOR THE FISCAL 
YEAR 201. 
THAT DOES NOT EVEN INCLUDE  
ESTIMATES OF THE INCIDENTS AND  
DISASTERS I TALKED ABOUT  
EARLIER, THE MANY TORNADOS AND  
THE MASSIVE FLOODING WE'VE  
INJURED -- INCURRED IN THE LAST 
TWO MONTHS. 
THAT'S WORRISOME. 
BUT LET'S TAKE A STEP FURTHER.
LET'S ASSUME THAT -- OR EVEN  
NOT ASSUME, BUT THERE'S A 
POSSIBILITY THAT WE WOULD SEE 
ANOTHER EVENT SIMILAR TO THE  
FLOODING, SIMILAR TO A  
HURRICANE.
HURRICANE SEASON STARTED JUNE 
1.
AND I THINK IT IS ABSOLUTELY  
IRRESPONSIBLE FOR US TO TELL  
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, IT'S 
DISENGINEOUS, IT'S WRONG AND  
SINFUL TO SAY WE'RE NOT GOING 
TO HELP YOU IF WE DON'T CUT THE 
BUDGET SOMEWHERE ELSE.
WE'VE NOT DONE THAT IN THE PAST 
AND I DON'T THINK THAT WE 
SHOULD DO IT. 
THE GREAT THING FOR ME TODAY, I 
GET TO STAND UP HERE AS A 
PERSON WHOSE DISTRICT BENEFITED 
TREMENDOUSLY FROM THE FACT THAT 
1271
00:40:19,000 --> 00:40:18,999
MISSISSIPPI.
WE HAVE WATER DIVERSIONS ON THE 
AND IN ORDER TO SAVE BATON  
ROUGE, LOUISIANA, AND NEW 
ORLEANS, LOUISIANA, WE OPENED 
THOSE DIVERSIONS WHICH FLOODED  
SMALL TOWNS, SMALL FARMERS, AND 
THAT HAPPENED UP AND DOWN THE 
MISSISSIPPI RIVER.
SO I STAND HERE TODAY AS A  
BENEFICIARY OF OTHER PEOPLE'S 
FLOODING AND OTHER PEOPLE'S 
DESTRUCTION THAT THEY SUFFERED. 
AND I STAND HERE TODAY AS 
SOMEONE WHO HAS NOT SUFFERED A  
LOT SAYING THE GOVERNMENT WAS 
THERE FOR ME WHEN KATRINA AND 
RITA HIT, AND THE GOVERNMENT  
SHOULD BE THERE FOR THE PEOPLE  
IN MISSISSIPPI, MINNESOTA,  
GEORGIA, MISSOURI, TEXAS, 
LOUISIANA, AND EVERYWHERE THE 
TORNADOS HIT. 
SO THIS AMENDMENT SIMPLY DOES 
WHAT I THINK IS THE FAIR THING  
TO DO, A CONSISTENT THING TO  
DO, AND SOMETHING THAT'S DEEPLY 
ROOTED IN OUR AMERICAN HISTORY, 
AND THAT IS TO HELP PEOPLE THAT 
CAN'T HELP THEMSELVES, AND I  
WOULD JUST SIMPLY ASK BOTH  
SIDES OF THE AISLE TO JOIN  
TOGETHER IN UNITY AND LET THE 
PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY KNOW 
THAT IF A TORNADO KNOCKS DOWN 
YOUR HOUSE THROUGH NO FAULT OF  
YOUR OWN, WE'RE GOING TO BE 
THERE TO HELP YOU NO MATTER IF  
OTHER ADMINISTRATIONS HAVE  
SQUANDERED AND SPENT MONEY THAT 
HAS LEFT US IN A DEFICIT, WE  
WILL STILL BE THERE TO HELP YOU 
AND I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF 
MY TIME.
1315
00:41:34,000 --> 00:41:33,999
 THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS 
BACK. 
1317
00:41:35,000 --> 00:41:34,999
RECOGNIZED. 
THE GENTLEMAN FROM ALABAMA IS 
 MADAM CHAIR, I  
INSIST MY POINT OF ORDER. 
 THE GENTLEMAN WILL 
STATE HIS POINT OF ORDER. 
 I MAKE AN 
AMENDMENT AGAINST THE AMENDMENT 
BECAUSE IT CONSTITUTES  
LEGISLATION IN AN 
APPROPRIATIONS BILL AND 
THEREFORE VIOLATES CLAUSE 2 OF  
RULE 21.
THE RULE STATES IN PERTINENT  
PART, AN AMENDMENT TO A GENERAL 
APPROPRIATIONS BILL SHALL NOT 
BE IN ORDER IF CHANGING 
EXISTING LAW CHANGES THE  
APPLICATION OF EXISTING LAW,  
AND I ASK FOR A RULING FROM THE 
1337
00:42:03,000 --> 00:42:02,999
 DOES ANY OTHER 
CHAIR.
MEMBER WISH TO SPEAK ON THE 
POINT OF ORDER? 
THE CHAIR WILL RULE.
THE CHAIR FINDS THAT THIS 
AMENDMENT CHANGES THE 
APPLICATION OF EXISTING LAW.
THE AMENDMENT, THEREFORE, 
CONSTITUTES LEGISLATION IN  
1347
00:42:20,000 --> 00:42:19,999
21. 
VIOLATION OF CLAUSE 2 OF RULE 
THE POINT OF ORDER IS SUSTAINED 
AND THE AMENDMENT IS NOT IN 
ORDER.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE 
GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS RISE?
MADAM CHAIR I HAVE AN  
AMENDMENT AT THE DESK.
 THE CLERK WILL 
REPORT THE AMENDMENT. 
 AMENDMENT OFFERED BY 
MR. POE OF TEXAS. 
AT THE END OF THE BILL BEFORE 
THE SHORT TITLE INSERT THE  
FOLLOWING SECTION, NONE OF THE  
FUNDS MADE AVAILABLE BY THIS  
ACT MAY BE USED TO PAROLE AN  
ALIEN INTO THE UNITED STATES OR 
GRANT DEFERRED ACTION OF A  
FINAL ORDER OF REMOVAL FOR ANY  
REASON OTHER THAN ON A CASE BY  
CASE BASIS FOR URGENT 
HUMANITARIAN REASONS OR 
SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC BENEFIT. 
 THE GENTLEMAN FROM 
TEXAS IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE  
MINUTES.
 THANK YOU, MADAM 
CHAIR.
WHAT IS TAKING PLACE IS UNDER 
1378
00:43:13,000 --> 00:43:12,999
ACTION. 
THE GUISE OF GRANTING DEFERRED  
DEFERRED ACTION IS A PROCEDURE, 
AN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE BY  
THE ADMINISTRATION THAT IS USED 
WHEN A PERSON IS DETAINED WHO 
IS ILLEGALLY IN THE UNITED  
STATES. 
AND THAT PERSON'S ACTION, THE 
CRIMINAL ACTION, OR THE ACTION  
TO DEPORT THAT INDIVIDUAL,  
RATHER, IS DEFERRED TO SOME 
UNKNOWN DATE. 
THE PERSON IS RELEASED, AND 
WHAT OCCURS IS THAT PERSON IS 
NEVER DEPORTED AND NEVER HAS A  
HEARING.
IT STARTED -- THIS PROCEDURE  
STARTED YEARS AGO WITH A FEW  
HUNDRED PEOPLE A YEAR.
BUT LAST YEAR IN 2010, OVER 
12,000 PEOPLE HAD THEIR IM
GRATION DEPORTATION HEARINGS  
DEFERRED TO AN UNKNOWN DATE.
AND WHAT OCCURRED WAS THEY WERE 
RELEASED, AND THEIR ACTION  
AGAINST THEM WILL NEVER BE  
TAKEN.
SOME CALL THIS A FORM OF  
1407
00:44:20,000 --> 00:44:19,999
AMNESTY, ADMINISTRATIVE 
AMNESTY.
YOU CAN CALL IT WHATEVER YOU  
WANT, BUT THOSE PEOPLE STAY IN  
THE UNITED STATES.
WHAT THIS AMENDMENT DOES IS 
PROHIBIT THE ADMINISTRATION 
FROM USING UNDER THE GUISE OF 
DEFERRED ACTION THIS PROCEDURE  
TO NOT HAVE HEARINGS ON AN  
INDIVIDUAL WHICH ALLOWS THEM TO 
END UP STAYING IN THE UNITED  
STATES, AND NO FUNDS CAN BE 
USED TO IMPLEMENT DEFERRED  
ACTION EXCEPT IN TWO CASES. 
ONE IS UNDER HUMANITARIAN 
REASONS, AND THE SECOND WOULD 
BE SOME SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC  
BENEFIT TO THE UNITED STATES. 
OTHERWISE, NO DEFERRED ACTION,  
NO GET OUT OF JAIL FREE CARD  
FOR PEOPLE ON A DISCRIMINATORY  
BASIS DONE BY THE 
ADMINISTRATION OR ANY OF ITS  
AGENCIES. 
AND I URGE ADOPTION OF THIS 
AMENDMENT.
AND I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF 
MY TIME.
 THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS 
BACK. 
DOES ANY MEMBER SEEK  
RECOGNITION ON THE AMENDMENT? 
1440
00:45:25,000 --> 00:45:24,999
 CHAIR?
 THE GENTLEMAN FROM 
ALABAMA.
 YES, WE ACCEPT  
THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS' 
AMENDMENT.
1446
00:45:34,000 --> 00:45:33,999
 THE GENTLEMAN  
ACCEPTS.
THE GENTLEMAN FROM NORTH  
CAROLINA IS RECOGNIZED -- FOR 
WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN 
FROM NORTH CAROLINA SEEK  
RECOGNITION?
1453
00:45:40,000 --> 00:45:39,999
 I MOVE TO STRIKE THE 
LAST WORD.
 THE GENTLEMAN IS 
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
 MADAM CHAIR, I 
SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT BECAUSE  
IT RESTATES THE DEPARTMENT'S  
BROAD DISCRETIONARY AUTHORITY 
TO GRANT RELIEF OR DEFERRED 
ACTION TO DESERVING 
INDIVIDUALS.
THE AUTHORITY OF LAW  
ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES TO 
EXERCISE DISCRETION IN DECIDING 
WHAT CASES TO INVESTIGATE AND 
PROSECUTE UNDER EXISTING CIVIL  
AND CRIMINAL LAW, INCLUDING 
IMMIGRATION LAW IS FUNDAMENTAL  
TO THE AMERICAN LEGAL SYSTEM. 
AND SINCE THIS AMENDMENT  
RECOGNIZES THIS ESSENTIAL 
EXECUTIVE AUTHORITY, ESPECIALLY 
WHEN IT COMES TO RELIEF FOR 
HUMANITARIAN PURPOSES OR WHEN 
IT SERVES THE PUBLIC'S  
INTEREST, I RECOMMEND THAT MY 
COLLEAGUES SUPPORT IT AND I 
YIELD BACK. 
 THE QUESTION IS ON 
THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE  
GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS. 
THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR,  
THE AYES HAVE IT. 
THE AMENDMENT IS AGREED TO. 
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE 
GENTLEMAN FROM NORTH CAROLINA 
RISE? 
 I HAVE AN AMENDMENT  
AT THE DESK.
 THE CLERK WILL READ. 
 AMENDMENT OFFERED BY 
1496
00:46:56,000 --> 00:46:55,999
 I ASK UNANIMOUS  
MR. PRICE OF NORTH CAROLINA.
CONSENT THE READING BE  
DISPENSED WITH. 
 WITHOUT OBJECTION, 
THE READING BILL BE DISPENSED 
WITH. 
 I MOVE TO STRIKE THE 
1504
00:47:07,000 --> 00:47:06,999
 THE GENTLEMAN IS 
LAST WORD.
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
 THANK YOU, MADAM 
CHAIRMAN. 
MY AMENDMENT WOULD WAIVE  
CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS ATTACHED 
TO THE FIRE GRANTS AND THE  
SAFER GRANTS, AND THIS  
AMENDMENT IS NECESSITATED BY  
THE AMENDMENT PASSED EARLIER  
THIS EVENING. 
MEMBERS ARE AWARE THAT H.R. 
2107 REDUCES FUNDING FOR  
FIREFIGHTER HIRING GRANTS, ALSO 
KNOWN AS SAFER GRANTS, BY $255  
MILLION, OR 63% BELOW 2011. 
FORTUNATELY, THE HOUSE  
RESOUNDINGLY OVERTURNED THAT  
ILL-ADVISED MOVE EARLIER TODAY  
AND ADOPTED AN AMENDMENT BY 
FROM LATOURETTE AND MR. 
PASCRELL TO RESTORE THE FUNDING 
TO THE PRESIDENT'S REQUESTED  
LEVEL.
BUT MY COLLEAGUES SHOULD ALSO 
BE AWARE THAT FUNDING IS ONLY 
PART OF THE PROBLEM WITH THIS 
BILL WHEN IT COMES TO THE SAFER 
PROGRAM.
THE UNDERLYING BILL ALSO  
NEGLECTS TO MAINTAIN PROVISIONS 
ENACTED IN FISCAL YEARS 
2009-2011 THAT ALLOWS FIRE  
DEPARTMENTS TO USE THESE GRANTS 
TO HIRE AND LAY OFF 
FIREFIGHTERS AND PREVENT OTHERS 
FROM BEING LAID OFF IN THE  
FIRST PLACE.
THE LAW TRADITIONALLY PERMITS 
SAFER GRANTS ONLY TO BE USED TO 
HIRE NEW STAFF. 
NOW, THAT PROVISION MAKES SENSE 
WHEN OUR ECONOMY IS BOOMING AND 
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS ARE IN A  
POSITION TO HIRE NEW WORKERS. 
BUT WHEN THE RECOVERY IS STILL  
FRAGILE AND LOCAL BUDGETS ARE 
ACTUALLY CONTRACTING AND  
WORKERS ARE BEING LAID OFF, 
FEMA NEEDS THE FLEXIBILITY TO 
USE THESE GRANTS TO KEEP  
FIREFIGHTERS FROM BEING CUT IN  
THE FIRST PLACE.
SECRETARY NAPOLITANO AND  
ADMINISTRATOR FUGATE TESTIFIED  
TO THIS NEED EARLIER THIS YEAR  
IN OUR APPROPRIATIONS HEARINGS. 
I AM PROPOSING A WAIVER 
AMENDMENT WHICH WOULD SAVE  
THOUSANDS OF FIREFIGHTER JOBS.
RIGHT NOW THE REAL CHALLENGE TO 
COMMUNITY SAFETY IS NOT THE 
RELUCTANCE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS 
TO HIRE NEW FIRE PERSONNEL, 
IT'S THE POTENTIAL AND ACTUAL 
LAYOFFS OF PUBLIC SAFETY  
PERSONNEL WHICH MEANS FEWER 
FIRST RESPONDERS, LONGER  
RESPONSE TIMES, AND MORE LIVES  
BEING PUT AT RISK.
THIS AMENDMENT ALSO CONTINUES 
THE PROVISION THAT WAIVES 
CERTAIN BUDGETARY REQUIREMENTS  
LOCAL FIRE DEPARTMENTS HAVE TO  
FILL IN ORDER TO RECEIVE A  
GRANT.
THESE INCLUDE NOT ALLOWING A  
FIRE DEPARTMENT'S OVERALL 
BUDGET TO DROP BELOW A CERTAIN  
LEVEL, NOT REDUCING STAFF OVER  
A NUMBER OF YEARS EVEN IF 
BUDGETS CONTINUE TO SUFFER, AND 
PROVIDING LOCAL MATCHING FUNDS. 
AGAIN, THESE PROVISIONS ARE 
FINE WHEN LOCAL COFFERS ARE 
HEALTHY BUT WE ALL KNOW HOW 
STRAPPED OUR CITIES AND 
COUNTIES ARE RIGHT NOW. 
SO IN THE CURRENT ENVIRONMENT,  
THE CURRENT ECONOMIC  
ENVIRONMENT, VERY FEW 
MUNICIPALITIES WOULD BE ABLE TO 
MEET THESE REQUIREMENTS, JOBS 
WOULD GO UNFILLED AND 
FIREFIGHTER AND PUBLIC SAFETY 
WOULD BE PLACED AT A GREATER  
RISK. 
FINALLY, TO ADDRESS CONCERNS  
THAT THESE WAIVERS HAVE GONE ON 
WELL BEYOND WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY 
ANTICIPATED, THE FIRE 
ORGANIZATIONS TELL ME THAT 2012 
WILL BE LIKELY THE LAST YEAR  
THAT THEY WILL NEED THESE 
WAIVERS.
WHEN COLLEAGUES ARE WEIGHING  
THIS AMENDMENT, MADAM CHAIRMAN, 
I ENCOURAGE THEM TO CONSIDER  
THE INTENT OF THE SAFER 
PROGRAM, ENSURING THAT WE HAVE  
A SAFE LEVEL OF STAFFING OF OUR 
NATION'S PREEMINENT FIRST 
RESPONDERS, THE FIREFIGHTERS. 
WE'VE ALREADY OVERWHELMINGLY  
SUPPORTED FUNDING FOR THE 
FIREFIGHTER JOBS BY ADDING  
FUNDING BACK TO THE SAFER 
PROGRAM, SO IF MEMBERS REALLY 
SUPPORT THESE JOBS, THEY NEED 
TO TAKE THIS ADDITIONAL STEP. 
WE SHOULD VOTE TO ALLOW THESE 
FUNDS TO BE USED IN THE MOST  
FLEXIBLE WAY POSSIBLE TO KEEP 
FIREFIGHTERS ON THE STAFF.
I URGE SUPPORT OF THIS  
AMENDMENT AND YIELD THE BALANCE 
OF MY TIME. 
 FOR WHAT PURPOSE 
1633
00:50:52,000 --> 00:50:51,999
DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM ALABAMA 
RISE? 
 I RISE TO STRIKE  
THE LAST WORD.
 THE GENTLEMAN IS 
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
 MADAM CHAIR, I  
RISE IN STRONG OPPOSITION TO  
THIS AMENDMENT. 
SAFER WAS ORIGINALLY AUTHORIZED 
FOR THE PURPOSE OF INCREASING 
THE NUMBER OF NEW FIREFIGHTERS  
IN LOCAL COMMUNITIES, A HAND  
UP, NOT A HAND OUT. 
SAFER WAS NOT INTENDED TO 
RETIRE OR RETAIN FIREFIGHTERS,  
AND CURRENTLY AND CERTAINLY WAS 
NOT INTENDED TO SERVE AS AN 
OPERATING SUBSIDY FOR WHAT IS 
UNQUESTIONABLY A MUNICIPAL  
RESPONSIBILITY. 
THE FEDERAL FIRE PREVENTION AND 
CONTROL ACT CONTAINS VERY 
SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS THAT  
LOCAL COMMUNITIES HAVE TO MEET  
1658
00:51:31,000 --> 00:51:30,999
. 
IN ORDER TO OBTAIN FUNDS. 
HOWEVER, THOSE REQUIREMENTS 
HAVE BEEN WAIVED THE LAST THREE 
YEARS.
WHEN INITIALLY PROPOSED BY THE  
DEMOCRATS IN 2009, MR. PRICE  
WHO WAS CHAIRMAN OF THIS  
SUBCOMMITTEE ACKNOWLEDGED NIECE 
WAIVERS WERE JUST A SHORT TERM, 
TEMPORARY EFFORT THAT WILL  
EXPIRE AT THE END OF F.Y. 2010. 
YET HERE WE ARE TODAY DEBATING  
THE CONTINUATION OF F.Y.-2012 
AS A SUBSIDY OUR COUNTRY CANNOT 
AFFORD. 
UNDER THESE COSTLY WAIVERS, 
THERE ARE NO CONTROLS, NO 
SALARY LIMITS, AND THERE'S NO 
LOCAL COMMITMENTS.
THESE PROPOSED WAIVERS TOTALLY  
UNDERMINE THE ORIGINAL PURPOSE  
AND INTENT OF THE SAFER PROGRAM 
BY FORCING THE TAXPAYERS TO 
SUBSIDIZE THE EVERY DAY 
1683
00:52:16,000 --> 00:52:15,999
. 
1684
00:52:16,000 --> 00:52:15,999
FIRST RESPONDERS. 
OPERATING EXPENSES OF THE LOCAL 
GIVEN OUR NATION'S DIRE 
SITUATION TODAY, WE MUST TAKE A 
STAND IT'S NOT THE FEDERAL  
GOVERNMENT'S JOB TO BAIL OUT  
EVERY MUNICIPAL BUDGET OR SERVE 
AS A FIRE MARSHAL FOR EVERY 
CITY, TOWN ACROSS THIS COUNTRY. 
THEREFORE, MADAM CHAIR, I WOULD 
STRONGLY URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO  
SUPPORT FISCAL DISCIPLINE AND 
VOTE NO ON THIS AMENDMENT.
 THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS 
BACK. 
 I YIELD BACK. 
 DOES ANY MEMBER WISH 
TO SPEAK ON THE AMENDMENT?
THE QUESTION IS ON THE  
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE  
GENTLEMAN FROM NORTH CAROLINA.
THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. 
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR,  
THE NOES HAVE IT, THE AMENDMENT 
IS NOT AGREED TO. 
PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 6 OF RULE  
18, FURTHER PROCEEDINGS ON THE  
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE  
GENTLEMAN FROM NORTH CAROLINA 
WILL BE POSTPONED.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE 
GENTLEMAN FROM LOUISIANA RISE?
 MADAM CHAIR I 
HAVE AN AMENDMENT AT THE DESK 
REGARDING TRANSPORTATION WORKER 
CREDENTIALS.
 THE CLERK WILL READ  
THE AMENDMENT.
1723
00:53:32,000 --> 00:53:31,999
.
NUMBER 28. 
 THE CLERK WILL READ  
AMENDMENT 28. 
 AMENDMENT OFFERED BY 
MR. SCALISE OF INDIANA. 
AT THE END OF THE BILL BEFORE 
THE SHORT TITLE INSERT THE  
FOLLOWING SECTION, NONE OF THE  
FUNDS MADE AVAILABLE UNDER THIS 
ACT MAY BE USED TO REQUIRE AN 
APPROVED TRANSPORTATION WORKER  
I'D CREDENTIAL APPLICANT TO 
PERSONALLY APPEAR IN A  
DESIGNATED ENROLLMENT CENTER  
FOR THE PURPOSE OF TWIC RENEWAL 
OR ACTIVATION.
 THE GENTLEMAN FROM 
LOUISIANA IS RECOGNIZED FOR 
FIVE MINUTES. 
 THANK YOU,  
MADAM --  
 THANK YOU, MADAM 
CHAIR.
WHAT I BRING FORWARD IS 
ADDRESSING THE BUREAUCRATIC RED 
TAPE AND INEFFICIENCY THAT'S  
CAUSING OVER A MILLION AMERICAN 
WORKERS TO MAKE MULTIPLE TRIPS  
TO GET A DOCUMENT THAT THEIR  
WORKERS REQUIRE, THE FEDERAL  
GOVERNMENT REQUIRES THEM TO 
HAVE, IT'S A TRANSPORTATION 
WORKER I'D CREDENTIAL AND IT'S  
AN IMPORTANT DOCUMENT TO HAVE 
BUT WAS CREATED BACK IN 2007  
WITH THE FIVE-YEAR LIMITATION 
AND HAS TO BE RENEWED.
A WORKER HAS TO GO IN A 
REGISTERED OFFICE AND GO AND  
GET THEIR FINGERPRINT TAKEN,  
THEY'VE GOT TO GET THEIR  
PICTURE TAKEN, PRESENT  
CREDENTIALS TO GET THE CARD.
THE PROBLEM WITH THE  
IMPLEMENTATION IS THAT THE  
DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN REQUIRING 
THESE WORKERS TO GO BACK  
MULTIPLE TIMES TO GET THE CARD  
WHEN IN FACT IF YOU LOOK AT A 
PASSPORT, EXAMPLE, HOW IT IS  
ISSUED, YOU CAN GO IN AND FILL  
OUT THE PAPERWORK AND THEN THEY 
SEND YOU THE PASSPORT.
IT WORKS THAT WAY FOR MOST  
FORMS OF IDENTIFICATION.
BUT FOR WHATEVER REASON IN THIS 
PROGRAM THE DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN 
REQUIRING MULTIPLE TRIPS. 
THE REASON IT'S A BIG ISSUE FOR 
ALL OF THESE WORKERS, THERE'S 
1.8 MILLION AMERICANS WHO ARE 
REQUIRED TO HAVE A TWID CARD TO 
DO THESE JOBS.
UNDER THESE CURRENT RULES THEY  
HAVE TO GO AND MAKE MUM TIM 
TRIPS AND IN SOME CASES IT'S  
NOT AN OFFICE DOWN THE STREET 
BUT AN OFFICE OVER A HUNDRED  
MILES AWAY. 
I HAVE A LETTER FROM THE  
PASSENGER VESSEL ASSOCIATION  
FROM THIS AMENDMENT AND THEY  
POINT OUT THE ENROLLMENT CENTER 
IS HUNDRED OF MILES AWAY FROM A 
MARINER'S HOME NECESSITATING  
TWO ROUND TRIPS OF MANY HOURS 
IN DURATION AND IT'S NOT  
UNCOMMON FOR THE MARINER TO BE  
FORCED TO STAY OVERNIGHT DURING 
EACH ROUNDTRIP AND OF COURSE  
THE EMPLOYEE HAS TO PAY FOR 
THESE ROUNDTRIPS, HAS TO PAY  
FOR THE OVERNIGHT AND HAS TO BE 
AWAY FROM THEIR JOB AND FOR NO  
VALID REASON. 
IN FACT, THE DEPARTMENT HASN'T  
EVEN IMPLEMENTED RULES TO 
PROPERLY UTILIZE THESE CARDS  
BUT YET ARE MAKING THE  
EMPLOYEES GO WITH THESE 
MULTIPLE TRIPS, IF YOU IMAGINE  
A STATE LIKE ALASKA WHERE YOU 
MIGHT HAVE TO SPEND DAYS TO GET 
THE CARD AND YOU HAVE TO FIRST  
GO SPEND DAYS TO GO FILE FOR  
THE CARD AND THEN YOU HAVE TO 
SPEND DAYS TO GO GET THE CARD.
THIS IS UNNECESSARY.
AND IT IS AN INCREDIBLE BURDEN  
ON OUR WORK FORCE AND IT'S  
SOMETHING THAT WE CAN ADDRESS 
BY PREVENTING THE FUNDS FROM  
BEING USED BY IMPLEMENTING THIS 
1827
00:57:05,000 --> 00:57:04,999
IT GIVES THEM BROAD DISCRETION  
POLICY. 
TO IMPLEMENT A SUCCESSFUL 
PROGRAM BUT UNLIKE OTHER FORMS  
OF IDENTIFICATION, OVER 1.8 
MILLION WORKERS SHOULD NOT BE 
FORCED TO JUMP THROUGH THESE  
BUREAUCRATIC RED TAPE HOOPS 
THAT ARE COSTING THEM MONEY 
THAT THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO 
SPEND ON THEIR FAMILY.
SO WITH THAT I WOULD ASK FOR  
SUPPORT AND YIELD BACK THE  
BALANCE OF MY TIME. 
1841
00:57:28,000 --> 00:57:27,999
 THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS 
BACK. 
DOES ANYONE SEEK RECOGNITION TO 
SPEAK ON THE AMENDMENT? 
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE 
GENTLEMAN FROM ALABAMA RISE?
 TO STRIKE THE 
LAST WORD.
 THE GENTLEMAN IS 
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
I'D LIKE TO ASK THE  
GENTLEMAN IF HE CAN CONFIRM 
THIS AMENDMENT REQUIRES THE 
APPLICANTS TO BIMETRICALLY  
ENROLL IN PERSON. 
 IF THE GENTLEMAN 
YIELDS, YES.
 I YIELD TIME. 
 THEY'D HAVE TO GO  
TO THE CENTER AND HAVE TO 
APPLY.
IN FACT, IN THE LANGUAGE OF THE 
AMENDMENT IT REFERS TO AN 
APPROVED TRANSPORTATION WORKER  
IDENTIFICATION CREDENTIAL.
SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO ACTUALLY  
GO AND BE APPROVED BECAUSE EVEN 
IF THEY WENT AND LET'S SAY THEY 
WERE REJECTED, THEN THEY  
1870
00:58:13,000 --> 00:58:12,999
CARD. 
WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO GET THE 
BUT IF THEY WENT TO THE CENTER  
AND GOT APPROVED, THEN THEY 
SHOULDN'T HAVE TO GO BACK AGAIN 
TO GET THE CARD SO IT DOES  
REQUIRE THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO 
IN PERSON, TAKE THE PHOTO I.D.  
AND IMPLEMENT THE BIMETRIC DATA 
BUT MAKE SURE THEY DON'T HAVE 
TO GO THROUGH THESE CONTINUOUS  
BUREAUCRATIC HURDLES TO GET THE 
CARD AND I YIELD BACK.
 MADAM CHAIR, I  
THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR 
YIELDING AND BASED ON THE 
REQUIREMENT THE APPLICANTS  
BIMETRICALLY ENROLL WE'LL 
ACCEPT THE AMENDMENT. 
1889
00:58:52,000 --> 00:58:51,999
 DOES THE GENTLEMAN 
YIELD BACK? 
 YIELD BACK MY 
TIME. 
 THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS 
BACK THE BALANCE OF HIS TIME. 
THE AMENDMENT IS OFFERED BY THE 
GENTLEMAN FROM LOUISIANA. 
IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR,  
THE AYES HAVE IT. 
THE AMENDMENT IS AGREED TO. 
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE 
GENTLEMAN FROM CALIFORNIA RISE? 
I HAVE AN AMENDMENT THE DESK 
DESIGNATED AS SHERMAN A.
 THE CLERK WILL READ. 
 AMENDMENT OFFERED BY 
MR. SHERMAN OF CALIFORNIA.
AT THE END OF THE BILL BEFORE 
THE SHORT TITLE INSERT THE  
FOLLOWING.
SECTION, NONE OF THE FUNDS MADE 
AVAILABLE BY THIS ACT MAY BE  
USED IN CONTRAVENTION OF THE  
WAR POWERS RESOLUTION, 50 
UNITED STATES CODE, 1541ED A  
SEQITOR.
 THE GENTLEMAN IS 
RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
 I HAD THE CLERK  
READ THE WHOLE AMENDMENT  
BECAUSE IT'S JUST ONE SENTENCE  
AND IT'S VERY SIMPLE. 
IT SAYS NONE OF THE MONEY IN  
THIS ACT CAN BE USED  
DELIBERATELY BY THE PRESIDENT 
TO VIOLATE THE LAW. 
IN PARTICULAR, THE WAR POWERS 
RESOLUTION OFTEN REFERRED TO AS 
THE WAR POWERS ACT WHICH IS 
FOUND IN TITLE 50 OF THE UNITED 
STATES CODE.
SO MANY HAVE EMBRACED THE IDEA  
OF AN IMPERIAL PRESIDENCY, HAVE 
EMBRACED THE IDEA A UNITED  
STATES PRESIDENT CAN SEND OUR 
FORCES INTO BATTLE FOR AN 
UNLIMITED DURATION, UNLIMITED 
SCOPE AND FOR WHATEVER PURPOSES 
1938
01:00:33,000 --> 01:00:32,999
THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH FINDS  
WORTHY. 
THE WAR POWERS ACT IS THE LAW 
OF THIS LAND. 
AND IT SAYS THAT A PRESIDENT  
MAY INDEED COMMIT OUR FORCES, 
BUT MUST SEEK CONGRESSIONAL 
AUTHORIZATION AND MUST WITHDRAW 
IN 60 DAYS IF THAT  
AUTHORIZATION IS NOT PROVIDED 
BY THE VOTE OF BOTH HOUSES OF 
CONGRESS. 
BUT THIS PRESIDENT, LIKE SOME 
OTHERS, BELIEVES HE DOESN'T 
HAVE TO FOLLOW THE LAW. 
AND IN FACT IN THIS CASE IN 
LIBYA, WE AND OUR ALLIES WERE 
NOT ATTACKED BUT RATHER A VERY  
IMPORTANT PURPOSE OR THOUGHT TO 
BE IMPORTANT BY THE PRESIDENT 
PRESENTED ITSELF AND SO HE  
COMMITTED OUR FORCES. 
THE RESPECT THE NATIONAL BRANCH 
FOR CONGRESS IS CALLED UPON 
THEM TO HIDE THEIR CONTEMPT FOR 
THE LAW.
AND SO THEY'VE IMPLIED WITHOUT  
STATING IT THERE ARE  
SUBSTITUTES FOR A CONGRESSIONAL 
AUTHORIZATION.
THEY'VE IMPLIED RESOLUTIONS BY  
THE UNITED STATES, THE ARAB 
LEAGUE OR NATO IS A SUBSTITUTE  
FOR CONGRESSIONAL ACTION. 
AND THEY'VE IMPLIED THAT  
CONSULTING WITH CONGRESSIONAL 
LEADERS, A LUNCH WITH 
LEADERSHIP IS A SUBSTITUTE FOR  
AN AFFIRMATIVE VOTE ON THE  
FLOORS OF BOTH HOUSES.
IT IS TIME FOR US TO STAND UP 
AND SAY NO, MR. PRESIDENT, YOU  
ACTUALLY HAVE TO FOLLOW THE 
LAW.
THIS IS DIFFERENT THAN THE LAW  
WE'LL DEAL WITH.
WE SHOULD TRY TO ACT NOW. 
IN ADDITION, THIS AMENDMENT 
OUGHT TO BE PUT ON EVERY  
APPROPRIATIONS BILL WE PASS 
THIS YEAR.
OTHERWISE, WE INVITE A  
PRESIDENT WHO SEES THIS 
AMENDMENT ONLY ON THE DEFENSE 
APPROPRIATIONS BILL TO TRY TO 
FIND CREATIVE WAYS TO TRANSFER  
MONEY FROM THE COAST GUARD  
ACCOUNT TO THE NAVY OR TRANSFER 
A SHIP TO THE NAVY TO THE COAST 
GUARD OR COAST GUARD TO THE 
NAVY ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
WE SHOULD NOT INVITE AN 
UNPRODUCTIVE LOOPHOLE HUNT. 
WE SHOULD HAVE THE SAME 
2002
01:02:55,000 --> 01:02:54,999
APPROPRIATIONS BILL.
RESTRICTION ON EVERY  
NOW, IF WE CAN PASS THIS  
AMENDMENT BY A SIGNIFICANT  
VOTE, THE PRESIDENT WILL, I 
HOPE REQUEST AN AUTHORIZATION 
FOR THE ACTION HE WANTS TO TAKE 
IN LIBYA. 
AND HE WILL HAVE TO ACCEPT AN 
AUTHORIZATION THAT WILL BE  
LIMITED IN TIME AND SCOPE.
PERHAPS IT WILL BE LIMITED TO 
AIR FORCES AND NOT GROUND 
FORCES AND PERHAPS REQUIRE  
RENEWAL EVERY SIX MONTHS  
INSTEAD OF BEING PERMANENT. 
THERE MAY BE CONDITIONS SUCH AS 
WHY ARE WE FUNDING THIS OUT OF  
TAXPAYER MONEY AND NOT THE $33  
BILLION OF GADDAFI MONEY HE WAS 
STUPID ENOUGH TO INVEST IN THE  
UNITED STATES IN WAYS THAT WE 
COULD FIND OUT ABOUT AND  
FREEZE. 
AND WHY HAS THE TRANSITIONAL  
GOVERNMENT IN BENGHAZI REFUSED  
TO DISASSOCIATE ITSELF FROM THE 
AL QAEDA FIGHTERS AND THE 
LIBYAN ISLAMIC FIGHTING GROUP 
FIGHTERS IN THEIR MIDST.
AND WHY SHOULDN'T WE SUPPORT  
THOSE WHO HAVE BLOOD ON THEIR 
HAND. 
THIS IS AN ISSUE OF DERELICTION 
IN CONGRESS.
BECAUSE, YES, WE'D LIKE TO  
AVOID TOUGH VOTES, PARTICULARLY 
THOSE THAT DIVIDE OUR 
CONSTITUENTS AND EVEN THE 
CONSTITUENTS WE HAVE FROM 
WITHIN OUR OWN PARTY. 
BUT THIS IS OUR CONSTITUTIONAL  
DUTY. 
THE WAR POWERS RESOLUTION IS  
THE LAW OF THE LAND.
WHATEVER YOUR VIEWS ARE ON OUR  
ACTIVITIES IN LIBYA, YOU OUGHT  
TO SUPPORT THIS RESOLUTION. 
I FOR ONE COULD SUPPORT AN  
AUTHORIZATION TO USE FORCE  
WHICH WAS CAREFULLY TAILORED  
AND SEVERELY LIMITED. 
. THIS VOTE IS NOT ABOUT  
DEMOCRACY AND THE RAUL OF LAW 
IN LIBYA. 
THIS VOTE IS ABOUT DEMOCRACY  
AND THE RULE OF LAW IN THE  
UNITED STATES.
 THE GENTLEMAN'S TIME 
HAS EXPIRED.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE 
GENTLEMAN FROM ALABAMA RISE?
I MOVE TO STRIKE --
