Brian Bilbray

Mr. BILBRAY

Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Speaker, I have recently introduced three bills, along with my colleague from Washington, Representative Jennifer Dunn. These bills, H.R. 3203, H.R. 3204, and H.R. 3205, would, if enacted, make only minor changes to our labor law, yet will provide major changes in the quality of the lives of many who serve this Nation as employees of the Federal Government. These bills not only continue this Congress' effort to force the Federal Government to conform to the laws that apply to all other citizens in this great country, but also bring additional accountability to one of our Government's largest Federal bureaucracies, the Department of Labor. Mr. Speaker, of all the worker's compensation programs nationwide, only the Federal Government's does not allow for judicial review of cases to insure fair and equitable access and redress. Although proposals have been introduced in the past to address this question, the opportunity for success in this endeavor has never been greater. The culture of Congress has changed, and with this change, there is a newfound persistence in finding innovative solutions to vexing problems which previously were more easily buried or ignored. H.R. 3205 not only provides a more equitable review process, but also provides reasonable time limitations in their deliberation. This bill expedites the initial decision process, eliminates the practice of redundant second opinions without legitimate legal or medical provocation, and provides the opportunity for claimants to have their own physician or representative present during the examinations. These provisions will significantly reduce the size of the quiet second opinions cottage industry that has developed in the wake of cases lasting up to 10 years, ruining the lives of the injured employees, and costing the Federal Government hundreds of millions of dollar. Additionally, H.R. 3205 requires the Secretary of Labor to fix physician fees at a level comparable to the limits placed on fees charged by the claimants own physicians. By equalizing compensation levels and structures, Federal workers can be assured that they are getting a fair hearing with honorable medical representation. Finally, H.R. 3205 requires the Secretary of Labor to provide reemployment and vocational skill training to injured workers to quickly return the injured employee to the workplace. Federal employees are valuable assets to the Federal Government, with millions of dollars spent every year in training. It makes little sense to waste the capabilities of these workers developed over years of experiences in the Federal workplace by forcing them to sit on the sideline, and in many cases, extract millions more from the Federal Government through disability and other compensation. H.R. 3203 and H.R. 3204 are bills with similar purposes, to streamline and expedite the workers compensation policies of the Federal Government to provide fair and equitable access for all workers. Specifically, H.R. 3203 would require that in cases requiring a second opinion, that physician will be selected on an impartial basis. H.R. 3204 would require that physicians selected to provide medical opinions be board certified in the medical specialty which is being called into question. Mr. Speaker, you would be surprised to learn that despite repeated attempts by my office to have the agency in question voluntarily modify this practice, my constituents continue to be diagnosed by physicians with no certification to diagnose injuries of the nature in dispute. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, these bills are commonsense solutions to very specific problems. They are not legitimately controversial, and will truly make a legitimate difference in the lives of the hard- working Federal employees who provide valuable and necessary Government services. Besides the relatively mundane Federal workers that staff our bureaucracies, these unsung heroes also include the valiant members of Border Patrol agents, Federal Firefighters, U.S. Marshals, Drug Enforcement Agents, and the Secret Service who put their lives and bodies in harm's way every day. Representative Dunn and I are committed to expediting the journey of these bills to the floor of the House of Representatives, and I urge the committee of jurisdiction to examine these issues in the context of this year's hearings, and move forward as quickly as possible.

Mr. BILBRAY

Mr. BILBRAY. As somebody who grew up on the border, the absurdity of the way local governments are required to handle these situations, to give you an example, you have the mother of a person born here in the United States, but she is an illegal alien. She will get the check for that child. But the law says that while she is here in the United States, she cannot work and she cannot spend one cent of that money on herself. Then we wonder why the studies in Los Angeles show that over 70 percent of the recipients that are receiving welfare checks that are illegal aliens are committing welfare fraud. It is because the law is absurd, and I want to point this out. I think the one thing we do is, we focus on the illegal alien issue or the immigrant issue. It is the absurdity of the rules we make in Washington and that they do not apply in the real world. This is a situation where we may be called mean-spirited, but the fact in Washington is stupid and it is irresponsible. We need to change these things and do something that is maybe a little radical to somebody, and that is do the reasonable thing in Washington, so those of us in California and Arizona and Georgia and across this country can do the reasonable thing.

Mr. BILBRAY. Would the gentleman yield?

Mr. BILBRAY. We will make that ambition our goal.

Mr. BILBRAY. Well, I would just like to say congratulations, and I would like to say it must be the fact they do not get as much sun in the West, so they are better preserved for a while, right?

Mr. BILBRAY. Go ahead.

Mr. BILBRAY. The gentleman from Georgia was just pointing out that the people in the community know how to serve their poor the best and that Washington does not know best. Let me tell you, as somebody who was a county supervisor in a county of 2.5 million plus people, that we operated a welfare system larger than 32 States. When we ran into welfare fraud, we actually ran into a situation where we realized we did not have pictures on the identification cards that welfare recipients use. Maybe being a little naive, I, as an administrator of a large welfare system, decided that it was time that we brought the system into the 20th century and put pictures on welfare cards. That is all we were saying, the ability to try to reduce fraud. Washington, D.C. said, ``We are not so sure we can allow you to do that because it might violate the privacy of the welfare recipients.'' Now I want you to remember that every time you look at your driver's license, and think about the fact that do you honestly think your government is violating your privacy by having you take a photo? I think that common sense approach that we fought so hard for in San Diego, in trying to get the Federal Government off our back and allow us to administer these programs in a reasonable, logical way, just really has to ring true here of saying guys, it has gotten out of control. Washington is not the only well of wisdom and compassion, and we have got to allow people to address the problems they see in their community and in the programs. As a past administrator, I sure hope this city learns to finally understand to trust the people with freedom and trust them to do the right thing. The American people are good people, and if Washington would just give them enough latitude to do the right thing, American people will do the right thing. I appreciate the time. I would just like to point out and to say to the gentleman from Georgia, I would like to offer him happy birthday tomorrow. I hear it is the gentleman's 41st birthday.

Mr. BILBRAY. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BILBRAY

Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Speaker, April 15 is a very important date in my family because my mother was a tax consultant. My family has been involved in income tax for 45 years and my wife now runs a business. While I keep hearing this discussion about the constitutional issue, let me remind you, the Founding Fathers not just once but twice specifically in the Constitution said the income tax should not be allowed. Twice in article 1. The first thing they did is they said you make sure you have fair apportionment of representation in the House of Representatives and a fair apportionment of taxes. So when someone brings up the founding Fathers, let us go back to the Founding Fathers' constitutional document and the 16th amendment was the only amendment that specifically reversed the direction of the Founding Fathers. It should have included a supermajority at the time the 16th was passed. Mr. Speaker, my family has listened to working-class people talk about being taxed too much and every time I hear people on the other side of the aisle say, ``We're only raising the taxes on the rich,'' go ask the middle-class people in my community in Imperial Beach and in San Diego and whenever you are going to lower the taxes, ``Oh, it's only going to be lowered on the rich.'' Let us be frank and open about it. That is what it is all about. You want more money to increase spending so you get more power in Washington and less freedom as individuals. I am telling you as somebody who has worked in the communities as a working class, you taxes are not on the rich, they are bearing down on the middle class, and they are sick and tired of it. They want the original Founding Fathers' intention that taxes should be fair and equitable and this amendment will help to do that.

Mr. BILBRAY

Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 956. Because of unwarranted product litigation, medical device manufacturers are in danger of being denied access to essential raw materials for the production of life-saving technologies. An alarming number of suppliers are refusing to sell these raw products to the manufacturers, for fear of being joined in a liability suit against the manufacturer. Mr. Speaker, a full 32 percent of the Nation's medical device manufacturers are headquartered in California. A great number of these are in my San Diego district. These companies make pacemakers, heart valves, and other implantable medical devices which improve the quality of life and ease the suffering of innumerable patients. These companies depend on patented alloys and synthetics, such as Teflon and synthetic polymers, to ensure that these devices will be compatible with the patients who need them. Under current law, the suppliers of these raw materials can be liable in product liability actions brought against device manufacturers, even though they have no role in the production or sale of the finished devices. As a result, many suppliers have announced plans to limit or discontinue sales of these raw biomaterials to device companies. This would drastically restrict the ability to provide these innovative devices to people who desperately need them. This bipartisan conference report will reform this tragic situation, by allowing suppliers to resume sales to cutting-edge California device manufacturers, and in turn ensure that patients nationwide retain access to state-of-the-art technologies. This is about people, Mr. Chairman, and doing what we can to make sure patients in need are provided relief from their afflictions and suffering. Mr. Speaker, this is a fair and bipartisan reform package, and I urge my colleagues to support it. Let us send H.R. 956 to the President, with the knowledge that Californians who need this reform are watching, as is the entire Nation. A veto of this bill, as promised by the President and supported by the Trial Lawyers Association, would be tragic; however, it would clearly demonstrate to the American people where the priorities of this administration truly lie.

Mr. BILBRAY

Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Speaker, I would first like to echo my colleagues' comments. My wife runs our family business which happens to be an income tax business. I heard a lot of talk in 1993 that the Clinton tax increase was only going to be a tax on the rich and the seniors who were wealthy. Well, I do not think the Members of the House really realized what they were doing. I will say this, and I need to say this so that I can go home to my bride in California this weekend. The fact is that she showed me one individual and talked to one individual who was a classic example of the so-called tax on the rich. This person made less than $14,000 a year, but because he happened to be a Latino who had very strong religious beliefs, he did not divorce his wife. He was married and filing separate. Eighty-five percent of his Social Security is being taxed. You remember in 1993 they told those of my colleagues who were here, this is only a tax on the wealthy Social Security recipients; it is not on the poor. Well, this man would like to ask: Would somebody in Congress tell him how rich he is? I think that that is one issue that is not discussed enough and we need to start bringing it up. As somebody who is involved in doing tax returns for the working class in my community in San Diego, Mr. Speaker, I hope to bring up more of those items, talking with the constituents who are being taxed by this Congress under the guise of taxing the rich, when it is the working class that is getting harmed by this unfair and unjust legislation. Mr. Speaker, another item that is unfair and unjust is that we have been trying to address this last week the fact that this Government of the United States has in the past rewarded people for coming across the border and breaking our immigration laws and then getting welfare, free education and free medicine, to the point where it is costing the State of California immense amounts of revenue, and the Federal Government has been walking away from this expense. The people in States across this country are paying this expense because the Federal Government has ignored it. Mr. Speaker, with the passage of H.R. 2202, Mr. Smith's bill, we are finally now seeing this Congress recognizing its responsibility under the constitution to address the fact of illegal immigration. But there is one part of the illegal immigration issue, Mr. Speaker, that has not been addressed. Mr. Speaker, I will just ask that we all consider the fact that giving automatic citizenship to children of illegal aliens is a problem we need to address. My bill, H.R. 1363, will address that, and we hope to work on that in the very near future.

Mr. BILBRAY

Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Chairman, my mother happened to be the first Australian war bride to become a U.S. citizen. She emigrated in 1944. I have cousins who would love to emigrate to the United States right now. But let me tell Members, I am sworn to represent the people of my district here in America, and I am not sworn to represent my cousins in Australia or to represent certain businesses that would love to be able to bring my cousins in to work for them. I am sworn to represent the general population of the 49th District of the great State of California. I think that we ought to be up front about this. Who are we serving here with the Chrysler amendment, who is going to benefit from this, and is it going to be the people of the United States? Mr. Chairman, it is not only our right to have an immigration policy for the good of the American national interests, it is our responsibility as Members of Congress to make sure our decisions on immigration are for the good of America, and America first. In the words my mother said to me when I asked her loyalty between Australia and the United States, she said ``America, America must take care of America first and that will help the rest of the world.''

Mr. BILBRAY

Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Speaker, as the House of Representatives begins debate on our comprehensive immigration bill today, I would like to focus on the human costs of our current immigration policy to highlight our most compelling argument for reform. I grew up in San Diego County, who can actually see our neighbors across our border with Mexico from his own backyard, I brought a unique perspective from San Diego to Washington when elected to Congress. Specifically, I was interested in educating Washington about its failed immigration policies, and the financial costs and human tragedies that these policies produced. I would like to enter into the Record the following news articles from my hometown paper, The San Diego Union Tribune. These are headlines that me and my constituents see every day. The news stories are a common occurrence, appearing with the same predictable regularity as our weather reports. Let me read you a few. From March 29, 1995: ``Fall kills border agent in foot chase.'' From May 5, 1995: ``Alien smugglers are packing cars for perilous treks.'' From January 26, 1996: ``Border crosser, told to pack no provisions, dies in mountains.'' From February 22, 1996: ``31 immigrants caught in stolen vehicles.'' And just this morning: ``Immigrant-document counterfeiting plant raided; 12 arrested.'' Most illegals who enter our country are seeking a better life, however, this motivation leaves them vulnerable. In San Diego, illegals will literally risk life and limb running up I-5 during rush hour traffic. Illegals crossing the Mexico border starve before losing their way, or die of exposure in the mountains. We hear constant reports of the horrific, filthy, inhumane conditions they endure at the hands of smugglers, or ``coyotes.'' Alien smugglers make money from their human cargo, and often entangle drug smuggling and other criminal activities in this enterprise. Illegal aliens are robbed and murdered; women and girls are brutally raped and abused by those involved in this insidious activity. As someone who grew up on our border with Mexico, someone who has pulled the corpses of illegals who drowned trying to cross the Tijuana River, I would like to tell you that this country's immigration system is broken, as these tales of tragedy and loss illustrate. I hope that our debate does not focus on intentions. Those who seek a better life in the United States should not be vilified. However, we must remove the attractive nuisance of public benefits which are available to illegal immigrants; we must give employers a way to verify the legal status of new employees, we must eliminate the backlog of legal immigrants waiting to be granted access--those who wish to abide by our laws but are frustrated by the pace of assimilation, and thus inclined to break the law to enter the United States. These are the distorted set of incentives that current immigration law has created. These distorted incentives reward those who break our laws, and frustrate those who wish to abide by them. Our current immigration system antagonizes and is contradictory to the very basis of the American dream. The American dream is based upon freedom and hard work. However, if those who wish to be American citizens enter our country illegally, they cannot expect to enjoy the benefits of our freedom; they cannot legally work to support themselves and their families; therefore they cannot hope to leave a better future for their children. I hope that my colleagues will join with me to reform our immigration laws to create a more compassionate system, and eliminate the incentives in our current laws which cause so much suffering. Immigrant-Document Counterfeiting Plant Raided; 12 Arrested (By Leonel Sanchez) San Ysidro.--U.S. Border Patrol agents brought down a one- stop illegal immigration service operating out of an apartment here yesterday, confiscating more than 3,000 fake documents. Agents arrested 12 people at the apartment and seized material used to make phony immigration documents, including ``several official Mexican and United States immigration seals and stamps,'' a Border Patrol spokesman said. The noontime raid came as illegal border crossings in the San Diego area were on the increase. A phony legal U.S. residence card, also known as a ``green card,'' can cost up to $500, Border Patrol spokesman Jim Pilkington said. ``Our agents disrupted a substantial and sophisticated false-document ring and dealt a serious blow to a very sophisticated organization,'' Pilkington said. He said the investigation continues and more arrests are expected. The raid followed a two-month investigation by agents assigned to ``Operation Wildcat,'' which targets smugglers in San Ysidro. Agents hit pay dirt when they executed a search warrant at an unidentified apartment near Interstate 5. They found eight men and women who had recently crossed the border illegally and were waiting to be transported north. Pilkington said they were to be deported. The four others arrested at the apartment were U.S. citizens-and legal U.S. residents. At least three of them are facing felony charges of immigrant smuggling and counterfeiting. Agents initially reported finding only 200 phony documents in the apartment but later said they found many more in different places. In all, they found 2,000 immigration documents, including Mexican passports; travel permits; border crossing, legal residency and work authorization cards; and California driver licenses. Agents also seized $5,000, four cellular phones and special scissors, glue, ``and numerous photographs'' that were to be material to make fake documents.

Mr. BILBRAY

Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Chairman, I would like to comment to my colleague from California, too. We will hear the business community say that if the illegals are here, it is better if they have a job than to just be hanging around unemployed, and so there are always excuses for encouraging the violation of immigration law. Mr. Chairman, my high school, Mara Vista, had many people coming to it that lived in Mexico, crossed the border and came to our high school. That was against the law, and it is against the law. But the absurdity of the Federal system, if we do not approve this amendment, is that it will be illegal to come into the country legally and go to a public school, but it will be legal to enter the country illegally, and then they have a guaranteed right to go to public education, and this is a $1.5 billion price tag to the people of California. Let me remind our colleagues, Mr. Chairman, this is not an issue that affects the rich, white people of this country. This is an issue that hits the school districts of the working class in this country. It is something that disproportionately is being placed on the working class school districts, and the Federal Government wants to put this mandate on and pay for the mandate totally. Do not ask the working class of this country to bear this responsibility.

Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Chairman, let us be up front about this. There are those who do not want us to be able to enforce our immigration law and want to remove every reasonable tool. They want to find excuses for that. There are those that say that somehow it is terrible to the employer. Mr. Chairman, let me give a letter from Virginia, who works for G.T. Bicycles. She said that the telephone verification program has given her peace of mind with the knowledge that G.T. Bicycles is complying with the law regarding employment, because if you are an employer, you have no way of knowing that the law requires you to get a Social Security number and to fill out an I-9 form, but you do not know if that number belongs to the person. There are those that are going to try to find excuses to strike this system and eliminate any reasonable point of enforcement of our immigration laws. So please do not say you are against illegal immigration, do not say you are against illegals getting public assistance, do not say you are against illegals taking jobs from people, but then say, Oh, but I am against having a reasonable enforcement vehicle. It is a cop-out. Let us be up front about it. Let us say, I really do not think illegal immigration is a real problem. I think these people ought to be allowed to come into our borders. But this system is a system that is the most nonobtrusive approach we can possibly do, in a system where we require reporting so we can raise taxes, so we can get money for the Federal Government. Mr. Chairman, when it comes time for us to participate in the securing of our national frontiers, of our national sovereignty, the Federal Government's number one obligation and responsibility, when it comes to that responsibility, Members are willing to walk away and find excuses to cop out. All I have to say is, if it is good enough and it is reasonable enough for us to move forward with some programs so we can enhance our coffers, then doggone it, it is time that we do the reasonable thing to control illegal immigration. But let us not sit there and vote for this amendment and then say, I really am against illegal immigration. This amendment will decide which way you stand, and the American people will know it.

Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Chairman, I would like to just sort of comment to the fact that I support this amendment. As somebody who has spent 20 years supervising law enforcement agencies, not just in local government but local government along the border, I must remind my dear colleague from Texas that this amendment does not make it mandatory that local law enforcement enforce the immigration aspect of the crimes that are being committed by illegal entering. It is voluntary. Mr. Chairman, I want to remind my colleagues from both California and Texas we are talking about the commission of a crime. When somebody violates immigration law and comes into this country, they are not illegal only when they break another civil law, a local law enforcement, they are illegal because they have broken the laws of the United States. It is, I just have to say, sort of interesting the fact that I do not know if my colleague from Texas or California are aware of things like the San Diego border task force, which is San Diego police officers patrolling the international border and getting in fire fights, gun fights with smugglers and other illegal activity that is related to the alien problem. I am not so sure that they have talked to the people that live along the frontier of this country and watch people jumping fences, violating their jurisdiction, but only being told that, well, this is a Federal issue and so local government should not be involved in the issue. In fact, I would ask, Mr. Chairman, that some of these people may be interested in the fact that 2 years ago, while there was flooding along the Tijuana River Valley that citizens were told that their local law enforcement should not intervene and stop illegal aliens from walking through their areas while looting was going on because somehow this might violate the jurisdictional lines between the two. Mr. Chairman, I would have to say to my colleague from California this is not an issue of the Federal Government encroaching out into the community. This is not an expansion of Federal jurisdiction. We are talking about the fact of doing what we talk about here, allowing the local community to contribute to the Federal effort. That is all we are saying, allow them to do it, Mr. Chairman. I strongly support the amendment.

Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Chairman, I would ask, as I listened to my colleague from California, that my colleagues from all over the country recognize that for those of us that operated public assistance programs locally, this law, this amendment, is an amendment to mandate welfare fraud. You do not understand this. Let me correct you. The fact here is if this mandate passes, you have somebody who is illegally in the country, who will be getting a public assistance payment only for their child; and the Federal law says that it is illegal for that person to work, it is illegal for that person to be in the country, and it is illegal for the parent to use the welfare check to support themselves. This is what we run into in southern California many times. You have parents of legal citizens who are taking checks. It is illegal for them to work, it is illegal to support themselves with the check, and that, Mr. Chairman, is why in one study we found 75 percent fraud in this category, and the rest of it basically is obviously fraud because it is a catch-22. So you are in a situation that when you say you are going to give illegal aliens public assistance funds for their children, you are de facto either giving them money to support themselves in violation of the welfare law, or you are condoning the fact that they are working in violation of the law. They are not declaring income, which is a violation of their welfare status for their child. So what we have is a catch-22 in an absurd situation. I know theoretically for the lawyers and the rest of them this thing should be handled a certain way. But I am telling you in practical application, common sense says that we should not have a Federal law that mandates fraud, and this amendment would encourage us to go back to a system that mandates welfare fraud. Mr. Chairman, I ask that the amendment be defeated.

Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Chairman, in the San Diego Union there was an article a few months ago that really pointed out the problem here. That is, there was a woman from the interior of Mexico who had actually taken the time to write three letters to the school district to make sure that her children could get a public education in the United States even if they were illegal. She could not believe it, so she waited three times to get an answer back that says, ``If I bring my children here, from Mexico, do I have to show they're legally here?'' And they said, ``No, you have no problem at all getting them educated in this country.'' I think that is the message we must stop sending.

Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the concerns. I wish my colleague from California was worried about the civil liberties of the people that are stopped by Federal agents, 70, 100 miles from the border, having their cars searched and being reviewed basically because Federal agents are now in our neighborhoods stopping all Americans. Frankly, if someone is going to stop and take a look at the immigration status, I think there is a level of comfort that, if we are going to have Federal agents doing it, it is not an intrusion on the community to allow, not to mandate but to allow local government to do the same.

Mr. BILBRAY

Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Chairman, I think really what I hear here is a different perception of the immigration issue, and to try to sensitize this institution to the fact of the level of concern we should have about this immigration issue, let me just show my colleagues the different perspective. All over America, when people drive down a highway, this is what they see, and I am sure many of my colleagues, that is what they see in their neighborhoods. But let me show my colleagues what the people of California see and people around the border see, and this is 70-80 miles north of the border. This is the kind of thing that we are confronted with, with absurdity. CalTrans from California was kind enough to send this sign to try to sensitize my colleagues to the fact that Washington must wake up and address this absurd, immoral situation. Mr. Chairman, people are being slaughtered on our freeways because Washington needs to address this issue and has been ignoring it. Mr. Chairman, this amendment makes it possible for us to try to address the reason why people are coming here: Jobs. Jobs are what are drawing them across our freeways and being killed and slaughtered. The fact is this amendment will finally address the issue in the least intrusive way of addressing the issue of trying to keep people from hiring people who are not qualified. Mr. Chairman, there may be those who think that this is a bad idea, but ask those who know that are affected. The Chamber of Commerce of California supports this amendment because they know. They have the reality of today of illegal immigration. They are not sitting in some insulated place, way off away from the problem. They know the problem, and they want this amendment. I would ask my colleagues to recognize that those who are against the national ID system should support this amendment. It is the least intrusive alternative to a national ID card. And those of my colleagues who say that they support the concepts of business, small business, more than any other segment of our society, uses telephonic, and listen to this. Of any part of society, small business is using telephonic verification now and has developed a dependency on it for business more than anyone else. All we are saying is let us learn from business, and Government should learn to use technology for the benefit of our society, just as the private sector is, and we should use technology for the benefit of protecting our citizens and noncitizens, and their freedoms and liberties. So support this amendment. It is the best nonintrusive, efficient way to be able to get the job done.

Mr. BILBRAY

Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Chairman, let me say that I rise in support of this legislation. Let me say I rise in support of it in no little way. I happen to be one of the few Representatives that will have the privilege of serving on this floor that not only has experienced the border issues but actually was raised and lives on the border. Mr. Chairman, it is time that this Congress and these American States of America get sensitized to the fact of the absurdity of the situation we have allowed to occur along our frontiers. Let me just sort of say very subtly to my colleagues here that Congress and only Congress has the authority to address the immigration policy. But as somebody who grew up on the Mexican border, I have had to live in my community with not only the crime, the destruction that has occurred from uncontrolled immigration and crime activity along the border, but also the human misery that is being imposed on the illegal immigrants. Our freeways are the scene of many people being slaughtered because smugglers are encouraging illegals to enter our country down the middle of freeways. Mr. Chairman, the Tijuana River Valley has been filled with corpses. And I would have to say, sadly, I have been involved in the recovery of bodies in the Tijuana Valley of people who were promised a better life but only received a death sentence because this country says one thing and does the other thing about illegal immigration. Mr. Chairman, I have seen what has happened to our society along the frontier to where not only in our country but in Mexico, nine police officers have been assassinated by the people who make their money smuggling illegal aliens. I have watched as we hear reports of not only agents but six illegals running off a 150-foot cliff because they thought they were chasing for a better life. Mr. Chairman, I would say to my colleagues on either side of the aisle who think immigration reform is somehow a bad idea, come to my neighborhood. See what this Congress is doing to the citizens and to the immigrants along the border. Mr. Chairman, we have a responsibility to control illegal immigration, and this body does not have a right to walk away from it. I ask my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Chairman, I would like to commend the gentleman from California [Mr. Hunter] because I think this body ought to recognize that the gentleman not only had the foresight but he also had the intestinal fortitude to address an issue that was ignored too long. We remember when this man was ridiculed because he talked about taking surplus matte and basically free welding classes being given to the National Guard to weld up a structure along the border. And everybody laughed at the gentleman from California [Mr. Hunter] and said it was outrageous, that it was not going to do any good. Well, let me say as somebody that not only lives down there but as somebody whose teenage daughter goes down to feed the horses within a half a mile of the border where Mr. Hunter's fence went up, I say to the gentleman, Mr. Hunter, thank you for having the guts to do what no one else dared to do. And I would say to my colleague, I know his concerns. Mr. Chairman, I just finished this weekend talking with some agents. Their concern is that they not be required to work within the perimeter but to be allowed operational latitude. I would ask the gentleman make sure that this administration gives the operational latitude. But this administration stopped this fence, refused to recognize the benefits of the fence. Frankly, I have got to go with a winning team, somebody who has credibility along the border. And in all fairness, this is a man who knows the border, has been successful, has had the guts to move forward and be ahead of the rest of the Congress on this issue. And I say to my colleague that there are those that may be concerned, but his experience, his success leaves me to say I have supported him along the border on this issue and I will take the heat. Mr. Chairman, I would ask those of my colleagues to come visit the border and tell me that it is not a safer place because this man stood up years ago and said that physical structures are part, not all, but part of the answer. I thank my colleague for giving us this fence.

Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in favor of the amendment and point out to my colleagues that the concern that was previously stated about the participation of States or local government in the issue of immigration control as being somehow a new radical idea just is not reflected in reality. Especially the gentleman from California. my colleague from California, must obviously be aware that the State of California at this time participates in immigration control through the participation of the National Guard of the State of California, who actually not only does observation and enforcement along the border for the INS but also does transportation and transport and processing for the Federal Government. And so this local-Federal cooperative effort on immigration control is not something new that is in this bill. It basically is a reflection of reality, that there are certain situations out there that we need to do in cooperation with States and local government. Mr. Chairman, let me make this point quite strong, and I want to say it to both sides of the aisle. There are people who believe that the Federal Government ought to be involved in law enforcement across the aisle in this country, across the board. There are those who believe the Federal Government should be involved in education across the board in this country. Their opinion is their opinion. They have the right to that opinion. But let me remind everybody here that it does not take an act of Congress for a school board to elect a teacher. It does not take an act of Congress for a city to hire a police officer. But, Mr. Chairman, it takes an act of Congress for local government and the States to cooperate with us on immigration control. It takes an act of Congress to address these issues that are before us in these amendments. So as we run around with a lot of issues of a lot of things we would like to do, that are nice to do, immigration control and management is something that only this body has the right to do as determined by the Constitution, as declared by the Supreme Court. So I would ask my colleagues, rather than finding the excuses to sort of walk away and side slip off this issue, to recognize that they want to justify being involved in all these other issues that are nice to do, but they recognize that the Constitution and the Supreme Court has ruled only Congress has the right to address these issues. Local participation in immigration control can only be delegated by the Congress of the United States. The city and the State and the school board cannot determine those things. If you do not want to have the guts to stand up and say, we want to cooperate with local government, to delegate this right and this responsibility and these authorities, then you should not be in this House or in the other house that believes in the Constitution, because this is a responsibility, Mr. Chairman, that we cannot give up, that we must accept.

Mr. BILBRAY. I am just saying from personal experience, what is said and what has been done are two different things. I think the one thing that we want these Chambers to have is that dose of reality of what really is going on out there. I just have to say, there is a lot of talk about it in the last 2 years. But what has been said and what is actually happening as somebody who every week I go to the border and talk with immigration agents, please be aware as somebody who cares about proper immigration legislation. We got to make sure that the border finds out about it and that the administration is doing what is being said, and that is all I am asking.

Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will continue to yield, I am not trying to be argumentative.