Robert Aderholt

Mr. ADERHOLT

Mr. ADERHOLT. The funds are included in support of border security, albeit to facilitate only the most necessary environmental mitigation activities directly related to border security construction, operation, and maintenance. However, I do understand the gentleman's position and concerns and, for that reason, we accept the amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentlelady's amendment.

Mr. ADERHOLT. The concern is that the amendment seeks to gut detention operations just as the administration has tried to do; whereas, this bill holds the administration's feet to the fire and provides the resources to force them to actually enforce the law. The committee recommends $2.75 billion for ICE Detention and Removal Operations, $71 million above the request to sustain a minimum of 34,000 detention beds. Detention beds are a necessary resource to support robust immigration enforcement. Make no mistake. There is a need for these resources. First, by the administration's own estimate, there are at least 1.9 million removable criminal aliens in the United States. There is the general acknowledgment of an illegal alien population of approximately 11 million. With the expansion of Secure Communities and ICE's prior utilization, there is no doubt they need at least 34,000 beds. Despite the fact that Congress has funded every request that ICE has provided for bed spaces, we have gotten excuses that they do not have the resources needed. Now the resources are being provided, and the committee insists that ICE intensify its enforcement efforts and fully utilize these resources. Let me say that countering child exploitation is a critical effort in this bill for which we already have provided increases for ICE and Secret Service activities. The Wasserman Schultz amendment, which will be brought up shortly, provides an additional 25 percent to the child exploitation center. We have been working with Congresswoman Wasserman Schultz on this amendment. We are accepting that 25 percent increase for the child exploitation center, so I would urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. ADERHOLT. I thank the gentleman for his support of the House report language on sensitivity for child passenger screenings, and it is certainly reasonable to include other vulnerable individuals like the elderly and the infirm. I will work with the gentleman going forward on these matters, and thank him for bringing the challenges of screening these other individuals to the floor. I look forward to working with him on this matter.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Will the gentlelady yield?

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chairman, we would gladly accept the gentlelady's amendment.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. ADERHOLT. I yield to the gentleman from Texas to talk about an important immigration enforcement program.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I share the concerns that have been raised by the gentleman from Texas this evening. The Department of Homeland Security needs the support of States and counties in border security, and SCAAP is an important tool to facilitate that support. I look forward to working with the gentleman to ensure that the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice find the right solution. I know that my other distinguished colleague on the Appropriations Committee from the State of Virginia has views on this program within his jurisdiction. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ADERHOLT. While the Federal Air Marshals Service, known as FAMS, does and certainly will continue to provide an additional layer in aviation security, the committee saw an opportunity in this bill to strike a balance and achieve some savings in a program that, before this year, had been growing rapidly. FAMS deployment surged following the 9/11 attacks and again following the 2009 Christmas Day bombing attempts. Exactly how they are deployed, and how many there are cannot be discussed in open session. However, it is possible to note that many other security measures have been put into place since both of those events took place. Intensified screening, new and more capable intelligence, information sharing, a more secure cockpit, and the expansion of the Federal Flight Deck Officer program are examples of steps taken to secure aviation that reduce the need to rely on FAMS on routes that do not represent the highest threat potential. The bill takes these security improvements into account and focuses on funding to cover the top priority routes based on threat, whether domestic or whether international. The bill also fully funds the FFDO program, which complements FAMs, and in some cases it is the only security element on board. In addition, the report directs the TSA and the FAMs to look again at how to include other Federal law enforcement agents working with them. This amendment, while I believe it is well-intentioned, would sustain funding to lower priority flights at the expense of other security measures that offer more immediate security impacts. The committee report calls for FAMs to brief the committee within 60 days on its optimal mix of staffing, scheduling, and recommendations for any regulatory or legislative actions needed to improve the FAMs operation. I believe the bill will support a robust and targeted FAMs mission, and I look forward to moving forward with a more focused and effective posture in aviation security. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chairman, I understand the concerns of my colleagues from the State of Washington and from the State of Alaska. It is important to keep the vessel intact. My subcommittee agrees with this important goal. I urge the Coast Guard to work with the authorizing committee to accomplish this assessment.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. ADERHOLT. I move to strike the last word.

Mr. ADERHOLT. We rise to oppose the amendment as well. We have concerns about the cuts in funding as well. I want to go on record that we do have concerns about this amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. ADERHOLT. As I mentioned earlier in the evening, our Nation does have an immediate need to build up our research capacity into pathogens that afflict animals and our food chain and, by extension, human beings. This amendment would put that at risk, and therefore, I would oppose the amendment. I now yield to the gentlelady from Kansas to have her speak on this amendment as well.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chairman, we oppose the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chairman, I would strongly urge my colleagues to support fiscal discipline as well as critical research and development. Therefore, with the concerns we have about the gentleman's amendment, we ask for a ``no'' vote on this amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ADERHOLT. I oppose the amendment because of concerns that we had noted earlier about the importance of the NBAF program that the administration has stressed, and also the need that was stressed in our hearings earlier in the spring. At this time I'd like to yield to the lady from Kansas to speak on this amendment as well.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chairman, we accept the gentleman from Colorado's amendment, and we appreciate him bringing this to the subcommittee's attention. With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chairman, I want to commend the gentlemen from Illinois and from Michigan for their commitment for search and rescue, and we would gladly accept their amendment.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment.