America's Immigration Policy
AMERICA'S IMMIGRATION POLICY -- (House of Representatives - November 03, 2005)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Iowa; and before I get to the topic at hand, I, too, would like to offer a few observations about the preceding presentation in the people's House.
Those who have heard me speak from time to time know that quite often I cite the observation of that great American author, Mark Twain, who said, history does not repeat itself, but it rhymes. In the preceding hour, here on the floor of the people's House, we may have heard from the, quote, 30-Something Coalition, but it was that same old something, those tired and shop-worn charges, those assertions that the American people can only regard, to put it diplomatically, as unrealistic.
We heard a Member from Florida talk about cuts in school lunch programs. We heard a Member from Massachusetts repeat what was a blatantly false charge about Medicare withering on the vine, when in fact the discussion had to do with the bureaucrats in a four letter organization felony as HICFA.
Indeed, there are fundamentally different ways to address the challenges we confront. My friends on the left honestly and sincerely believe that Government is the answer; and though their rhetoric is devoid of it, they seem to be concerned with budgets that affect the care and feeding and the propagation of Washington bureaucrats and the employees' unions they engender rather than solving real problems affecting real people.
It is somewhat mind-boggling to hear the same old charges; and it is interesting, the selective memory of those on the left. For it was one of their celebrated leaders, John F. Kennedy, who said a rising tide lifts all boats, who said that by reducing taxation across the board and allowing the American people to save, spend and invest their own money economic prosperity can result.
And that is not a partisan argument, nor was it the sole domain of Jack Kennedy. Indeed, whether it was Calvin Coolidge or Jack Kennedy or Ronald Reagan or, more recently, George W. Bush, working with this governing majority in Congress, letting the American people have and keep more of their own money to save, spend and invest, we in fact have had an economic rebirth through the difficulties of 9/11, through the challenges posed by the natural disasters.
The American economy continues to grow. Are there challenges? You bet. Are there challenges we confront in energy? Absolutely. But the key is, as I was happy to offer, tax credits for solar energy in our sweeping energy bill, as many of us have embraced and asked us to take a look at new technologies, neither do we abandon the notion of maximizing existing supplies, using rational conservation and moving forward.
Of course, it cannot begin to compare with outlandish charges. This gets to the crux of the challenge. We have an awesome responsibility. It is to help govern this country. Our friends on the left, be they 30-something, or 40-something or 50-something, or 60-something, choose not to join us in governing. They choose to carp and complain and issue malicious and libelous charges. They offer no plan. They offer complaints.
In stark contrast, our governing majority has a plan to bring budget reform that results in real savings. And yet, even as they decry what they call fiscal irresponsibility, they attack the reform process that results in real savings.
One note about the incorrect information on student loans. We actually increased money going to students. We tightened down the margins on the lenders. We do not hurt the students. But, of course, our friends on the left always equate compassion with the amount of money taken from the American people to go to Washington bureaucrats; and I believe, regardless of the age, regardless of the time, that is precisely the wrong formula. Just as they mistakenly address compassion by the number of people on welfare. No, true compassion is the number of people who leave the welfare rolls and go to work.
And for those who cite curious cases played up in the dominant media culture about CIA agents who send spouses on trips around the world to offer talking points in a partisan campaign and somehow defend that and seem to act as if there is no connection between the former, thank goodness, the former dictator of Iraq who now sits in a prison cell awaiting trial and other perpetrators of islamofascism, for those who would so readily forget the lessons of 9/11, we say to the American people, yes, the challenges are grave. We live in challenging times. But we dare not shrink from the challenge and make the curious divorcement of, oh, yes, we support our troops but not the conflict.
As one observer explained, that is like saying, gee, I support a football team. I just do not want them to win the game.
Were it so simple to compare war to a game, but we know something far more serious is at stake. We know over very national survival is at stake; and we believe that we should support our troops, yes, and work for an outcome that results in victory.
That brings us to the subject at hand tonight, our border security and our national security. And despite the prattlings of the preceding hour, in many ways our Commander in Chief has answered the call in the wake of 9/11.
But when it comes to the border issues, the fact is the record is troubling, and it results in constructive criticism. Just as many within our party offered constructive criticism about the selection of a Supreme Court judge, reasonable people can offer constructive criticism.
Item. Congress Daily, this morning, Thursday, November 3, Homeland Secretary unveils border security initiative. Homeland Security Secretary Chertoff Wednesday rolled out a multi-year plan to secure the Nation's border and reduce illegal immigration, dubbing the proposal as the, quote, enforcement complement to President Bush's temporary guest worker program.
Constructive criticism number one, in accompanying documents released yesterday in Houston, Texas, Secretary Chertoff said his Department had a 5-year plan to gain operational control of the borders.
Mr. Speaker, the American people and our Nation cannot wait 5 years for operational control of our borders. The attacks of 9/11 came almost a half decade ago. Are we then to wait 10 years in wartime to secure our borders? That is wrong. That is the wrong time table. Border security at once because border security is synonymous with national security.
The other troubling aspect of the dispatch in this morning's Congress Daily, the enforcement complement to President Bush's temporary guest worker program.
Mr. Speaker, I have introduced, and my colleagues who join me tonight on this floor have sponsored, the Enforcement First Initiative. The American people demand enforcement first. Call it putting the cart before the horse, but those who talk about a guest worker program have it exactly backwards. What we should do is enforce existing laws, close loopholes and then and only then engage in a debate about guest worker programs.
Indeed, this debate about border security, national security, illegal immigration, and the euphemism that accompanies it of undocumented workers, an Orwellian turn of phrase if there ever was one because many of these alleged undocumented have documents galore, and should we also point out that under the existing framework we have visa programs literally from A to Z under the existing legal framework, but again back to the situation at hand.
A fair question could be posed in this fashion: If people are not obeying existing laws, what makes us think they would obey any new laws? So Enforcement First offers a comprehensive approach saying that this government shall enforce existing law and that we shall work to eliminate loopholes that exist that result in the gaming of our system, that result in the drain on taxpayers and that deny this fundamental truth that even those who may profoundly disagree with us who preceded us here in the well certainly have to embrace and that is that this is a Nation of laws.
Therefore, if we are a Nation of laws and a Nation of immigrants, immigration should occur within a legal framework, not through the machinations of illegal schemes and scams that threaten our national security.
Why do I say that? Well, one need look only so far as the testimony in open session in the other body from our former colleague Porter Goss, now Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, joined by others, who offered the testimony that their major concern is that someone meaning to do harm to this Nation might utilize our porous border to do so, to come here illegally. Indeed, we have seen other reports that al Qaeda operatives and others who embrace Islamofascism have instructed their minions on a mission in this hemisphere to seek to gain entry to the United States through our porous southern border.
The Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation in testimony before a House subcommittee chaired by our friend, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Culberson), confirmed the gentleman from Texas's (Mr. Culberson) assertion that illegals who come from nation-states embracing Islamofascism have attempted to gain entry into our country by blending into the mass exodus north of illegals and utilizing Hispanic surnames.
Mr. Speaker, I offer these words not to sow the seeds of panic, but instead to offer a renewal of a sense of purpose in the wake of 9/11, mindful of the challenges a sovereign Nation of laws confronts. We must have heightened border security. It leads to greater national security. There must be internal enforcement. There must be a closing of loopholes, and that is the idea behind the notion of Enforcement First.
So, Mr. Speaker, I say respectfully and diplomatically to the Secretary of Homeland Security, enforcement is not a commitment to a guest worker program. Enforcement is the long overdue step to protect our Nation from external threats in a time of war. And then once we do that, we can effectively discuss a guest worker program.
My friend from Iowa who was very gracious to yield time. I will remain, but I want to yield back to him because other friends join us tonight during this hour.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Iowa, and I look forward to hearing from our colleague from Pennsylvania who, again in stark contrast to those who preceded us in the well, takes a thoughtful look at the challenges we confront and offers some common-sense solutions, especially in the realm of natural gas and where we are headed as a Nation in terms of energy exploration for existing technologies and, quite frankly, bringing on-line new technologies to deal with energy.
But as I heard both my colleague from Virginia and my colleague from Iowa talk about the spectacle that occurred in the hallway of the Rayburn House Office Building yesterday, I just was astonished by the seeming triumph and insensitivity of the bureaucracy.
Two minders accompanying a law enforcement officer essentially to put him on notice that his role in his employment with the Federal Government could very well be threatened. We have visited totalitarian nations where there are minders who follow us, some very cleverly concealed, some as hotel personnel, but to see that spectacle in this grand republic and see it utilized really to try and supercede the legitimate questions of constitutional officers was very disappointing.
I would echo, Mr. Speaker, the words of my colleague from Iowa, there will be oversight. Count on it. The Congress will live up to its constitutional responsibilities. I will put those Washington bureaucrats on notice, those who believe they can get in the way of constitutional officers doing their jobs, that the people will demand answers through their constitutional representatives. But we understand the answer, in summation to our challenge for national security and border security, it is enforcement first. It is not amnesty. It is not the embrace of putting illegals in the front of the line and making a mockery of an orderly, lawful, immigration process.
Borders are necessary. There is graffiti written in Spanish on one of the borders adjoining my State which reads, Borders are scars upon the earth. Mr. Speaker, borders are not scars upon the earth. Borders are reasonable and necessary to maintain the sovereignty of nation states; and, as the poet wrote, good fences make good neighbors.
I salute the gentleman from Virginia joining with the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee with the True legislation today. I am pleased to be a cosponsor. I thank my friends from Virginia and from Iowa, others within the Immigration Reform Caucus. I thank them for the time, and I look forward with interest to hearing from our colleague from Pennsylvania with references to the challenges we confront here early in the 21st century for this Nation's energy needs.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
http://thomas.loc.gov