John Carter

Mr. CARTER

Mr. CARTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank the ranking member, also, for working with me on this. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moran).

Mr. CARTER. I thank the chairman for his support and also Mr. Goodlatte, the chairman of the committee, has expressed his support of this program also. It is the future of looking at how we do government, and I am excited to be able to be going forward on this. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CARTER

Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate being recognized and the ability to have the chance to address the House this night on the issue we all know is the most critical issue our Nation faces today, that is the security of the American borders and the sovereignty of our Nation. I rise because I am from Texas, and I grew up crossing the Mexican border with our neighbors from Mexico all of my life. I have even been several times to the great international celebration in Nuevo Laredo for George Washington's birthday, a time in which thousands and thousands of Texans joined their neighbors in Mexico for a great fiesta. I consider Mexico, my entire life, I have considered them my friend and our neighbor to the south. I actually went to school in Mexico. I am very familiar with the country, and I have a warm regard for the people of Mexico. However, the world we live in today is not the world I grew up in. I have had the occasion in the last 6 months to visit Nuevo Laredo with Congressman Cuellar on two occasions. I have been down there with Congressional delegations that have visited the border to talk about the incursions into the United States by literally hundreds of thousands and millions of people coming out of Mexico across our southern borders from San Diego to Brownsville. But the world I know is Texas, and I am going to talk about the Texas border that I am familiar with. I want to tell you that I sat out in a pickup truck on the side of the Rio Grande in a mesquite thicket in the dark with one lone border patrolman and his electronic equipment, which was a camera that scanned 2.5 miles in either direction, a stretch of the river, right in the city limits or on the edge of the city limits of Laredo, Texas. I got to sit out there on that lonely job with that young man for a pretty good while and talk to him about what he has experienced. He says what every rancher and farmer and homeowner that lives on the border of Texas today repeats: This is not the same bunch of people that used to come across our border. They are coming in waves, and they are doing damage and breaking into homes, and they are stealing things. Whereas they used to come by a pepper's house with their hat in their hands and the rancher wife would put dinner out on the back porch for them, today they break into the house; they have no regard for private property. They have no regard for anything that is going on in Texas. They just think it is their right to come into Texas, and they are acting that way. This young man told me, he said, I asked him, I said, how many people? The first time I visited was in the wintertime. I said, how many people will come across? He said, well, it is winter. Maybe a couple of hundred tonight. But in the summer, maybe a couple of thousand in my sector that I will turn back on some given nights. This is a number that way surpasses anything we have ever experienced in our State, and all the other States along the border are experiencing this problem. But, you know, I have been thinking about this, and this is not a problem that just started last week. I firmly believe that we enhanced the problem of the Mexican border, especially our southern border, with the amnesty bill that we passed in 1986. We gave a message, and in that message, it was clear: Come on in, boys, you are welcome, and in they came. Their thoughts were, I can go, most of them came for jobs. But I used to be able to say, when I was a young man and a teenager, the people who came over here are coming to work. I am telling you, you can't say that today. You can't say that every person that crosses that border comes to work. That border patrolman told me a tale that will chill your soul. In the El Paso sector in December, they stopped 15 illegal immigrants, all of whom claimed to be from Mexico, all of whom voluntarily agreed to return. So they fingerprinted them and processed them and took them back to Mexico. They ran those fingerprints through, I think it is NCI or whatever it is that they use with the Border Patrol, and about five of those finger prints had previously been recorded by the United States Government. Those prints came from a cave in Afghanistan. Now those were not people coming across our border from Mexico to get a job. But they were blending in with those who were. We live in the world of 9/11. We live in a time when an enemy has launched and successfully accomplished the worst attack on the United States in the history of the United States. We have people we don't know coming across our border. We are doing a lot of talk about enforcement. We are doing a lot of talk about writing new laws. We go, oh, my gosh, let us rush out, and we have got to come up and figure out how we get a work program. We have got to come up with citizenship for these people. We have got to know what to do with these people. Sure, these are problems that we have to address sometime, and I am sure soon. But my concern is, we are not analyzing this problem the way the problems should be analyzed. The legislation we are hearing that is coming this way from the Senate, and my way of thinking, is a totally improper way to analyze a problem of the United States. I spent almost 21 years as a district judge in Texas. I had many, many, times, where I had a multiple-issue case that I had to choose. But a jury would use the same analysis to try to figure out a solution to a problem. So I will use that example. But the same example could be used for a surgeon in an emergency room. You have a problem, and you look at that problem, and you say, well, this problem has multiple issues we have to deal with. We have evidence to cover these issues. We need to examine those issues, that evidence closely and come up with a solution to these problems. But first where is the ongoing harm? Where is the bleeding? You have got to stop the damage that is there right now today before you move on to the damage that may be coming down the road or to work on other issues to determine the solution. I would say the bleeding is at the border. We have got to stop the bleeding. The surgeon that is at the emergency room when they are bringing someone, if there is arterial blood flowing, he is not worried about a CAT scan or an X-ray or whether this man might have cancer or diabetes. He wants to stop the bleeding. If we don't go and address the issues on the border as the House bill has done to stop the bleeding, if we don't do that, we are analyzing this problem wrong. You know, we could stand around in this House, and we can talk about whose fault is it. You know, hindsight is 2020, but the truth is, the fault lies across the board, and we ought to step up and say so. From 1986 until the present, we have had both Republican and Democratic administrations. We can all point the finger and say, you did it. But as you point that finger, point it back to you. The fact is, we have not met our duty to the American people. But now we see a crisis. Ask any American, where is the crisis in immigration, and something like 90 percent of them will say, at the border. Before we deal with anything, we have got to stop the flow. That is why the House bill is so very important that we go forward on it. You know, we took an oath in this House. The President of the United States took an oath. That oath was that we would, to the best of our ability, perform the duties of the office to which we had been elected and preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. We took an oath to do our job. Those people we hire to work for us assist us in doing that job. Mr. Speaker, I am very concerned that as we rush to judgment on the issue of immigration, that we start talking about amnesty and we start talking about creating a program where people who have broken the laws of the United States are going to be given special privileges that even people who are born here don't get. There are things now being proposed in the Senate bill as to collecting back Social Security, having the Davis-Bacon Act apply to all of your wages, and unbelievable things where even every American doesn't have those benefits. Talk to my teachers back in Texas about some of their missing Social Security benefits they have been trying to get for, Lord, it has got to be 50 years. And yet we are looking at this and putting patches on it, and the patches are getting worse and the tire is going flatter. Mr. Speaker, the executive and those on both sides of the aisle have failed. When we wrote the law in 1986, we had laws that pertained to crossing our borders and we didn't enforce them. We had laws that pertained to employers and we didn't enforce them, and the Congress failed in its duty to do that also. I would argue the worst offender of all are the bureaucrats. But all that is beside us now. We cannot continue on with a system that doesn't work at the border, where some nights 16,000 people come across that border. I went out and pulled up some of the old law books just to find a few things, because you hear people say well, they are not really breaking any laws. Shame on you. Somebody wants to make this a felony. I don't think anybody has ever looked to see what it is. It is a civil, not a criminal file for the first crossing. But it continues on. Illegal entry carries a punishment of fine and imprisonment of up to 6 months. Harboring undocumented aliens carries a fine and imprisonment of up to 5 years. Alien smuggling carries a fine and imprisonment up to 10 years. Those are felonies, 5 and 10 year sentences, in my opinion. A crime that causes a serious bodily injury to any person, the penalty is a fine and a sentence of up to 20 years in prison. Reentry into the United States is a felony charge punishable with fines and/or imprisonment for 2 or more years. If reentry is after a previous non- aggravated felony, it is up to 10 years. If it is after an aggravated felony, it is up to 20 years. Now, I would like to know, are we enforcing those laws? I used to sit in the courtroom and do a jail call every Monday morning. I would call the jail and we would bring people over and find out who was in jail. Inevitably, once, twice, three times a month, we would have anywhere from two to 20 illegal aliens in the jail. Inevitably. We would call INS and tell them, we got some of your people here. You need to pick them up. They would say if they are there on Thursday, we will get them. They would all bond out on Tuesday and be gone. Now, is the Immigration and Naturalization Service doing the duty that our laws gave them to do? No. We have failed to enforce the laws that are on the books today. So we are not in a panic to create laws to prevent these people from coming in here. We have laws we are not enforcing. Now the tide has become overwhelming for law enforcement. This overwhelming of us is what we are talking about. This is where the bleeding is. This is where the bleeding has got to be stopped. The bill that we passed through this House, I would like to add things to it, were I given the opportunity. Hopefully there will be more resources for our Border Patrol, resources on the border, electronic surveillance, unmanned drones and all of the other things that technology provides for us today, to help us stop this invasion. I use the term ``invasion,'' and I don't take that hesitantly. While I was there, I saw a film of what now we are being told were drug dealers coming across the border in what looked like to everybody there Mexican military uniforms, carrying satchels of drugs with automatic weapons and vehicles. Now, it has not been resolved as to exactly who those people are, but, you know, if it looks like the Mexican army, I wonder if it is? I think we ought to know that. I think we ought to have an answer to that. Most of Europe went to war over an invasion in 1939 and it ended up being World War II. I am concerned about the invasion across our southern border. I am concerned we are not enforcing the laws. I am convinced that the solution to this problem is to do our job, and if we do our job and enforce the laws that are in place and make a conscientious effort to study the best possible solution for every one of the multiple problems that exist in this immigration and border security issue, let's stop the bleeding at the border and then let's put the good minds in this House on both sides of the aisle to work in cooperating to come up with real lasting solutions, and not forgetting that we have laws we can enforce now as we come up with solutions for these other things. That is basically the way I view this thing. I want to yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher), who also would like to address this House on this important issue.

Mr. CARTER

Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to rise to say that one of the great blessings in my life that has been bestowed upon me is that I have been given a district now where we have almost 50,000 of the people who stand on the wall and defend our Nation, Fort Hood, Texas. It has made me realize the real duty that we have to the American soldier, the American military personnel. Being on this subcommittee and being able to try to do what is good for these men and women who give their duty, honor, to our Nation every day, is a great blessing to me personally. This bill that we have got here today is an honest attempt, within the resources, to do a great job for our military. I think, quite frankly, we have done a great job. I would urge, and I listened to what Mr. Edwards had to say. Mr. Edwards and I worked together. He also is a very good friend of Fort Hood. I would urge my colleagues, as they look at, as we proceed in this debate, that they, first and foremost, keep in mind that soldier, sailor, airman and marine, that stand on the wall every day and defend this Nation's freedom. As they look for technical challenges and other things that may occur, hopefully, will be corrected, that they will take that soldier's best interest in mind first. This is, if there is a piece of legislation that goes to the Congress at any time, that thinks about the individual guy carrying a rifle, this is it. If we can, we have to; and we must make sure they have the best health care, the best living facilities, the best facilities on post, the best equipment, the best that we can give them. I think we have done our very best to do that, and so I rise to speak on behalf of the American soldier and ask this House to keep the American soldier in mind in this debate.

Mr. CARTER

Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, in 1991, the Texas legislature authorized the establishment of the Texas Institute of Applied Environmental Research (TIAER) at Tarleton State University. Congress quickly recognized the merits of the effort and since 1992 has provided an average of $500,000 a year and the U.S. Department of Agriculture has added $4.5 million dollars. These dollars have been effectively leveraged, and when added to state and private funds, total funding has exceeded $45 million. This project is an excellent example of how critical federal support can effectively trigger matching funds to help meet the needs of this country. The mandate for the organization has been to: Conduct applied research on environmental issues that have public policy implications Provide a setting for environmental studies that focuses on the interface between government and the private sector Provide national leadership on emerging environmental policy Establish programs and partnerships with public and private institutions of higher education, governmental agencies, or private entities to develop and implement new policies, technology, strategies, relationships and sources of funding. The organization's mission statement is: ``TlAER conducts scientific research, economic inquiry, and institutional, statutory and regulatory analyses to address pressing environmental issues facing the state and nation and assists public entities in developing and implementing policies that promote environmental quality.'' strong economy, healthy earth TIAER continues to fulfill its mission by assembling and supporting a multidisciplinary research staff. TIAER houses economists, engineers, attorneys, agricultural scientists, mathematical modelers, communication specialists, water quality scientists, graphic artists, computer scientists, and water quality monitoring specialists to address the next generation of Clean Water Act initiatives. TIAER was among the first to recognize that emerging environmental issues in agriculture required new policy. TIAER developed the Planned Intervention Microwatershed Approach (PIMA) to address landscape-based, polluted runoff issues. PIMA uniquely links USDA voluntary programs with EPA programs in a manner that is tailored to the needs of production agriculture. PIMA protects privately-held lands from government intrusion. TIAER operates a one-million-acre outdoor laboratory, the Bosque River watershed, which consists of cropland, ranch land and, in the upper reaches of the North Bosque, a 250,000-acre watershed that is home to one of the largest concentrations of dairy farms in the Nation. The Bosque River watershed provides TIAER with a cross-section of agricultural lands and enables TIAER to address many of the environmental issues that production agriculture will face over the next quarter-century. industry-led solutions (ILS)--leadership toward environmental solutions A major focus of TIAER's work began with the conception of ``Industry-Led Solutions'' (ILS) in 1999. TIAER has hosted four national workshops and two regional Gulf of Mexico workshops with leaders of animal agriculture, the row crop industry, environmental groups, and government to explore ways that agriculture can proactively address environmental initiatives that will enable agricultural producers to be good stewards of the land while maintaining the economic viability of the industry. The intent is for ILS to serve as a ``think-tank'' for agricultural environmental issues. The Nation is at a strategic point in determining how agriculture can meet Clean Water Act objectives. ILS is TIAER's response to the need for agriculture to become proactively involved in both policy initiatives and developing science-based programs that will lead to sustainable agricultural practices that provide for a strong economy and a healthy Earth. Agricultural producers and TIAER work together in a unique manner. Agricultural producers lead all ILS initiatives. TIAER provides staffing for ILS programs. The multidisciplinary staff of TIAER enables ILS to address all issues related to resolving environmental issues in agriculture. TIAER is unique in other ways: TIAER recognizes that the U.S. economy must remain strong in order to have a healthy Earth--``Strong economy, healthy Earth.'' TIAER has the capacity to move quickly to address new initiatives. The TIAER Director reports directly to the Tarleton State University President. In addition, TIAER staff work full-time, further enabling TIAER to move quickly. The institute operates in an entrepreneurial manner. TIAER has no permanent funding. Therefore, the institute must address issues that are seen by TIAER clientele as pertinent and useful in addressing problems and issues they face. As a proponent of ILS, TIAER brings together the distinct concerns of entrepreneurs and environmentalists to develop effective public policies and cooperative, science-based solutions. In the past 30 years, efforts to improve the Nation's waters focused on cleaning up point source discharges--with great success. Now, however, water quality efforts will increasingly address nonpoint sources for the next increments in water quality improvements. The Clean Water Act of 1972 provided little insight into how agriculture would address polluted runoff from crop and ranch lands. It has become evident over the past decade that agricultural lands are in the crosshairs of the EPA and environmental groups. The challenge lies in developing programs that are specifically tailored to the needs of agriculture. At this fifteen-year anniversary, TIAER looks toward facilitating future successes in improving our Nation's air and water quality. That is a laudable goal, and it is made possible by congressional appropriations support that triggers valuable matching dollars. I hope my colleagues will continue to support successful efforts like this--responsible federal funding triggering additional financial support. That is a partnership that makes sense.

Mr. CARTER

Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, this morning, and every morning in my memory, members of my district, Americans all across this country and my colleagues in the Democratic Party went out and got in their cars, started them up and drove to work or drove to school. They wouldn't have done that if there hadn't been gasoline or diesel in those automobiles. And yet, the Democrats have been opposing refining capacity, opposing pipelines, opposing drilling in ANWR, opposing going to the reserves that we know are available if we will just drill the wells and produce the petrochemicals that are necessary to keep this country running. The reason we have got the problem today is obstructionism to solve the problem which is, let's put gas and diesel in our tanks so we can keep America going to work.

Mr. CARTER

Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, on February 28, 2006, Williamson County lost a hard working friend of the community with the untimely passing of Williamson County Commissioner S. Thomas McDaniel. Tom was an effective, grassroots politician. A close friend and advisor, I had the honor of swearing Tom into office as Williamson County Commissioner for Precinct 3 on November 2, 2004. Well-respected by his colleagues, Tom brought a new perspective to Williamson County politics. In some areas he probably stepped on a few toes and in other areas he was a breath of fresh air. Commissioner McDaniel was a steward of the communities in Williamson County's Third Precinct, continually working to improve the region's infrastructure. He continually encouraged efficient, effective operations at the county level. During his service as Commissioner, construction began on the City of Georgetown Public Library and the Williamson County Courthouse Restoration began, among other successes. Born in Terrell, Texas, on April 1, 1944, Tom is a third generation Texan. Tom is survived by his lovely wife of 32 years, Linda, and his son, Ryan. Tom was a really fine man, and I am going to miss him terribly. He will be missed by me, my family, and all of Williamson County.

Mr. CARTER

Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, my son Johnny and his new bride bought a house last fall. He is a baseball coach at our local high school. He has joined a record number of people, the largest in the history of the United States, who own their own home. The great American Dream, to own your own home. The naysayers say the economy is struggling, but the facts do not prove out to be the truth. More people own their own home in America than at any time in the history of our Nation. We are growing. We have an unemployment rate of 4.7 percent, and that is one of the lowest in history. Texas unemployment is at an all-time low in modern history. Our economy grew a solid 4.1 percent in the third quarter, the 10th straight quarter of GDP at a rate above 3 percent. We are producing more. We are growing more. We are providing more jobs. We need to prevent the tax increases that many in this body wish to make. We need to make sure that we maintain a good tax structure and keep the tax cuts in position so that this growth will continue. It is good for the American Dream.

Mr. CARTER

Mr. CARTER. I thank the gentlewoman from Tennessee and all those who gather here today to talk about our national security. One of the things that has been bothering me here recently, there was a movie that just came out called War of the Worlds, and in that movie they were flipping cars around and the space invaders were coming around, and you saw the fear and panic on the faces of the people on the streets as this made up story of the invasion of our country from outer space. And I could not help but be struck by the fact that we saw exactly that same live and in color fear on 9/11 when those people were watching those buildings burn, and all of a sudden the first one came crashing down. And we saw films on television of that absolute panic of American citizens as they ran in abject fear from the falling of those buildings, the attack on our Nation. We saw films of people leaping from windows. This is what our national security is all about. As Judge Poe said, it is about protecting the American citizen. While this is the subject of such conversation all over our Nation today, let us do not forget we have got to protect ourselves. Now, I, like Judge Poe, have been dealing with law enforcement most of my adult life. I have tried a substantial number of felony criminal cases. One of the things that we always would do that we worked into law enforcement is we wanted to have interagency cooperation. We wanted to be able to let the DEA and in Texas the Texas Highway Patrol work together on a drug case, work in cooperation, share information. But as we approached a view of how we were going to secure this Nation, we discovered that we had a lot of agencies in this Federal Government and in the State governments that really were not coordinating, working together. Tools that we have used for years in criminal justice were not being used for securing our Nation. So some brave folks got together here in the Congress, and they wrote the PATRIOT Act. This PATRIOT Act, because of partisan politics, in my opinion, and the fact that this is a world where everybody likes to criticize everybody else, we forgot about those people panicking in the streets of New York now, and we are starting to tear up a document that makes sense. And I think it makes sense to the American people. I think it makes sense to say I would sure like to know that every agency that is involved with somebody who might want to attack me or my family in this country talks to each other, shares information, does not have bureaucratic boundaries set up which prevent them from doing this. The FBI should share information with the CIA. The CIA should share information with the DEA. And all other codes for the various groups that are up here, they should get together and share that information. The PATRIOT Act set up those procedures to do that. Does anybody have a problem with that? I cannot imagine an American citizen having a problem with that. Do you not want your FBI agents and your prosecutors, the people who work on this stuff, to talk? Do you not want them to be able to communicate, share what they have got? Now, if I think somebody is planning on blowing up a building, just like I am really concerned about somebody who might be worried about smuggling drugs into this country and I want to have a surveillance on that facility where I think this illegal activity or this terrorist activity is taking place, I do not see anything wrong with being able to have procedures set up, which we have used in fighting the war on drugs for years where you go in and take a look and then you back off until the perpetrators get there and then you go in and make your raid. But you can put a title on that, a sneak and peak warrant, and it sounds horrible. It sounds terrible. It sounds like the government is sneaking around peaking on private citizens. No. Why should you let them know when you are not there that you have been there? Go get them when they are there. We are here to stop these people. Why should we have to conduct investigations and tip off the people we are investigating? Does that make sense? So we have proper legal proceedings that have gone on in this country for a decade or so in fighting the war on drugs and the war on crime. We are using this in the war on terror. That is part of the PATRIOT Act. I do not see why the American public would feel like they were intruded upon at all. Law-abiding American citizens are not intruded upon at all by this. Some people are just shocked that the PATRIOT Act actually looks into business records. How do you think you finance people to come over here, train to fly a 747 or a 727, and crash into a building without some money? If that money is being done for terrorist activities, why would you not want the investigating agencies to have the ability to go into business records and find out about these things? It certainly makes common sense to me, and it is something we have used. In fact, many of you may recognize now in your life there was a time you could come into this country and deposit money or you could go down to the bank and deposit any amount of money you wanted to in the bank. But there were people coming from other sources with huge sums of money that they were laundering through our banking system for the drug business. So what did we do? You have to report every $10,000 deposit and every $10,000 withdrawal. Nobody got all upset about that in the United States. That is dealing with people's business records. But it helped us find out where the drug dealers were, and it helped to keep their dirty money out of our legitimate system. Now we want to know where the terrorists' money is, and I think it is appropriate that we look at those records. Now, does it make sense to you that you have to hunt for somebody to issue a warrant when there is a criminal procedure, a criminal procedure that is going on all over the entire United States, that you have to go to just one particular jurisdiction to get it when it affects all jurisdictions? No, it does not make sense. You should be able to seek a warrant anywhere there is jurisdiction. The PATRIOT Act allows that to happen on terrorist activities. This is a good law enforcement tool. The warrant still has the same checks and balances and protections and probable causes that are there for anybody. But why do you have to hunt down a judge in Arizona when you can find one in California when it all affects the same territory? The PATRIOT Act increased penalties on these terrorist crimes. Now, I personally am a penalty guy. I believe in penalties. I have sentenced a person to 20 years in prison for one rock of crack cocaine because I believe punishment works. That is my personal philosophy, and some Americans might not agree with it. Our county happens to have the lowest crime rate in the United States, but that is my argument. But the point is the terrorist penalties have been enhanced by the PATRIOT Act. That is good. That helps us use another tool to keep people who want to harm our wives, our children, our husbands, our communities, give them extra punishment for what they do. Those who harbor those who would harm us we also have tools to go after. This is the goal of the PATRIOT Act. That is what it was established for. It is a good tool. It is a tool that is effectively helping us. One of the major reasons that all those who deal with these issues talk about them right now, today, is because we have been able to protect this Nation since 9/11. Nobody is sitting here telling you that everything is perfect; but if you throw away your tools and you put up the things that help you solve the problems, in my opinion, for political reasons, it concerns me greatly that the real purpose of homeland security is lost, and that is protecting our families and our way of life. The USA PATRIOT Act should be renewed. We should continue this tool for the American agencies that deal with terrorism and law breakers and making sure that when our kids go to bed at night, they feel a little bit safer.

Mr. CARTER

Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. This amendment would ensure that the Secretary of Homeland Security would look at all technical solutions to find the best solution for effective two-way communication on the United States border. By specifically requiring the Department of Homeland Security to include satellite communications as part of this solution to curing the inefficiencies of existing communication on the border, Congress would be ensuring the consideration of the only proven communication tool that can maintain the constant connection to the Border Patrol officers in the field, thereby saving their lives and providing homeland security seamlessly and flawlessly. In many instances during the recent natural disasters of hurricanes Katrina and Rita, satellite technology was the only reliable method of communication. Moreover, this technology has been used extensively by the U.S. military in inhospitable and remote areas of Afghanistan and Iraq. Satellite communication has proven its worth. During the Katrina disaster, I had a conversation with the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Porter) about going down with a load of provisions to help folks down there. When he arrived at the town, I do not remember the name of the town, he ask if they had talked to FEMA and they said, yes, they gave us a phone number to call, but, unfortunately, our cell phones do not work, and our land lines are down so there is no telephone in this town. Mr. Porter had his satellite phone with him. He shared his satellite phone with those disaster victims, and they were able to communicate with FEMA. Given the unique characteristics of our border area, satellite technology would be specifically useful in alleviating many of the communication problems that currently exist and can be done in a very cost-effective way to the U.S. taxpayer. This amendment ensures that all available options would be considered instead of limiting the Border Patrol to outmoded and frequently ineffective technology. I ask my colleagues to support this amendment because it will greatly enhance the U.S. Border Patrol's ability to protect our Nation's borders and provide for their individual safety. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. CARTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from New York (Mr. King).

Mr. CARTER

Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, this year the President of the United States, George W. Bush, raised the issue and started the great debate on Social Security. The American public learned that our Social Security system is in trouble, and they know that if we do not do something, we are going to be facing a crisis. You can debate when that crisis is going to happen, but no one now will doubt that there is a crisis. I believe we can dream a dream for an America in which everyone can have a living amount of money that they can retire on. Right now, if Social Security is all you have got, you are in trouble. It is time for us to continue this debate. It is time for us on both sides of the aisle to come to the table and address Social Security and come up with solutions which will increase the amount of available income to our retirees and to our elderly, so that all people in America can live the American Dream, both now and when they reach their golden years. Let us not stop the debate on Social Security. Let us continue to look at this important issue.

Mr. CARTER

Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, this week, seniors across the country can take the first steps towards much-needed prescription drug benefits when they enroll in the Medicare prescription drug plan. The plan gives seniors the power of choice. Seniors will select from multiple plans and choose the option best suited to their needs. With the cost of prescription drugs increasing every year, the ability to choose a plan tailored to that senior's specific health needs is invaluable. Not only that, but choice encourages competition. Private companies will be making their prices available for seniors to compare. This, in turn, will lower prices in an effort to secure those seniors' business. By giving the seniors choice, we give them lower prices. Mr. Speaker, the Medicare prescription drug coverage card is long overdue. I am proud of Republicans for providing a viable solution to America's seniors, and I encourage seniors all across the country to take advantage of these added benefits.

Mr. CARTER

Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to remind seniors all across America that they can sign up for Medicare prescription drug coverage starting today, November 15. As of January 1, 2006, Medicare begins offering participants drug coverage for citizens 65 and older. Medicare will work with employers and unions to ensure that people who currently receive prescription drug coverage through their employer or union will continue to do so. Like other insurance, if you join, you will pay a monthly premium, generally about $37, plus a share of the cost of the prescriptions. Costs may be different, depending on the drug plan you choose. Plans will vary in the prescription drugs covered, how much you have to pay, and the pharmacies you can use. All drug plans will have to provide at least a standard level of coverage which Medicare will set. Some plans may offer more coverage and additional drugs for higher monthly premiums. I encourage you to join the drug plan that best meets your needs.

Mr. CARTER

Mr. CARTER. That is right. And if the gentleman would yield once again. As we talk about this, let us reemphasize again to our seniors the importance of getting registered and signed up for the program. You know, as the gentleman was talking about these drugs, and we read the list off, of those drugs I am familiar with and some of them I am not. But I thought about how much medicine has changed. And you are the doctors. I am just an old lawyer and trial judge. But I can recall that my father almost died from bleeding ulcers. As a younger man, I was working my way down that road, and, in fact, at one point in time had an ulcer. But Tagamet, I am not plugging any particular brand, but that is the name I know of because that is what I took when Tagamet came on the market; and with that drug, I have never had any more problems whatsoever with ulcers, where my father almost died. They had to give him 7 pints of blood, and he had to be cut from stem to stern like he had been in a knife fight to try to save his life and they had to remove two-thirds of his stomach. Medicine now can stop a condition that we used to solve with major surgery with prescription drugs. This tool is now available to our Medicare recipients. It is critical that they understand, do not be frightened even by what we have tried to make simple here tonight. Some could even be frightened by that. Do not be frightened by that. Make the effort to save your life. Make the effort to go out there and have every tool that you can be one of those blessings to our country, and that is a senior citizen with long life and good wisdom to pass on to future generations. And you can only be that way if you take care of yourself. And part of taking care of yourself is getting signed up so that modern medicine can care for you, because with no offense to the great work that our surgeons do, in the long haul, having had a couple of those surgeries myself, I will take that pill all day long and into the night before I want them to cut me wide open because I think modern medicine has been proven over and over, that good preventive medicine, which we now have in this plan, meaning going to get your checkups, get your tests for which you are now covered, do those things that were not available but are now available to you to make sure you are maintaining a look at your health. And the prescription drug plan along with the other normal medical benefits that have been available before make this a better future for our senior citizens, a better, healthier, longer future. I cannot impress it upon our people enough. This is so, so life changing in the world. It is not perfect, and we all would love for the world to be perfect. But you know what? When we came in here, somebody hit on it tonight, when we came in here and signed up for Congress and they dropped those half a dozen or a dozen plans in front of me, it might as well have been written in Greek. And I sat there and stumbled and fumbled and said I am sticking with my Texas plan and stayed right where I was. And that is my own fault. And I am confessing it right here in front of God and everybody that that is what I did. But in fact I thought I had a better plan in Texas anyway. But that is a different story. But I understand their frustration because it is a frustrating thing. But that is the world we deal with right now.

Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey), my good friend, for yielding to me; and I actually came down here because, Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey) is probably one of the people that has dedicated more time and effort to the health care issues that affect the American public than any other Member of this Congress. On many occasions, he has educated me on health care issues and given me good advice and good counsel on how we need to make health care available, because the health of our Nation is very important to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey) and all Members of this House on both sides of the aisle. We battle and toil with how exactly we are going to address health care issues. I really wanted to start and come down here and share with the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey) an absolutely true event that happened to me personally; I guess by now it is probably almost 2 years ago or maybe even better. It was right after I was blessed to join this august body. I was back home in my district, and I was back at my pharmacy, that I am not going to advertise for, but where I regularly buy my prescription drugs. I was standing in line for my turn to get prescription drugs, and I am sure people have told this story that I never had actually experienced, a story like this, until I heard the story. There was a lady that was at that time being waited on by the pharmacist there at the counter and getting her prescription drugs, and they brought them to her. She was getting two prescriptions as I recall, one for herself and one for her husband. I do not know how old this lady was, but she was clearly on Social Security because she said so. This was when we were still working on trying to come up with a prescription drug benefit that would help our senior citizens. She asked the pharmacist how much the two prescriptions were going to be. The price was very expensive for both of the drugs that she was going to have to pay, and between the two drugs, it was going to add up to, as I recall, over $500 for these prescriptions. She told the pharmacist, well, I cannot get these two prescriptions and continue to feed my husband and me on what we have to live on; I am just not going to be able to do it. Would it be possible that I could get half of the prescription? The pharmacist said, well, ma'am, the one for you was obviously for something that had come upon her. The other was an ongoing prescription for her husband, the way I understood it. He said, your doctor has a reason he wants you to have this whole prescription. It may have been an antibiotic or something like that. I am not in the medical profession, but the pharmacist clearly said you need to take all of this prescription; you just cannot take half. Well, she said, ma'am, I just cannot spend that kind of money and take care of my family. When you heard that, when you actually heard that from a human being, you said to yourself, we have got to do something to get some relief for people like this lady that was standing there. I was two people back from her in line, and what I heard that day from that lady touched my heart to where I really felt like I had seen the crisis firsthand. We have now put together Medicare part D, as my colleague from Georgia has been explaining and will be able to explain in far better detail than I can as to what the benefits are for this, but we have now got a solution for that lady who was standing in line, and it is now time for people to start going out and getting signed up for Medicare part D. That is why I wanted to come join my colleague tonight in the hopes that people in my district and people across this entire country will hear our message that the time is here. We have arrived at the time when they need to go down and register to get involved in Medicare part D. And benefits will actually start, as Mr. Gingrey has explained, in January of 2006. Now, I have traveled my district and I hold town hall meetings, and a lot of our senior citizens are concerned about, well, this seems so complicated, I do not know whom to turn to. And we are here to let the people know this is important to them and their loved ones. There are people there to assist them. I would ask the families of those Medicare recipients that need help, sometimes as we grow into our later years, little things become big things to folks like my parents, who now are deceased, but I can remember when they become big things for them as we grow older. And I would hope that the families of these people along with these folks will encourage them to go look into getting registered, getting set up in a plan. There are multiple plans that are offered. There are people there to help them understand those plans. There are people to tell them what fits their life, their life-style, where they come from, and I would hope not only those people who are going to be eligible for the program but those people who have folks in their family that will be eligible for the program will encourage them to go down and talk to folks, get the help, get signed up. It is not as complicated as people think it is. There is a lot of fear that is unwarranted fear of this program. It happens on everything we do. When we deal with the government in many areas in our lives, dealing with the government is a frightening thing, dealing with plans and paperwork. This is cut down to where it is not going to be that hard to understand the plans. There are people there to look at what people's circumstances are and tell them and show them which plans offer them the best options. Every State except Alaska has a State plan, as I recall. There are regional plans, and there are 10 nationwide plans that are available. There are multiple options that they can talk to them about. People can talk to their pharmacists. Medicare has people that will help them. Call that number, 1-800-Medicare, and they will explain how to sign up. It is so important to your family. Do not let a little fear or a new world attitude that you do not understand keep you from getting signed up for a benefit. Because this is going to be able to assist all Americans in their health care needs, and it is especially going to be of great assistance to those people who are in the lower economic sector of our country. In most instances, those people who make, I think, $11,500 as an individual and $22,000 as a couple, they are basically not going to have hardly any Medicare costs for drugs. So it is important that you not let the fear of a new program or something you might have seen on television or some political rhetoric that was in some campaign somewhere that got you concerned that you would not be able to understand what the program is about to keep you from getting what you need so that you never have to be like that lady who stood in line in front of me and have to make a decision as to whether you took your medicine. Does my colleague know what was really loving about that story? There was no question she was going to buy her husband's medicine. She never even blinked on that. She was saying, I will give up so we can live our life here what I need, but of course there is no question I am buying the medicine for my husband. That kind of love permeates American society, and I think we have a duty to our loved ones who are eligible for Medicare to help them and encourage them to go get signed up for this. Because Americans do care about their elderly. Americans do care about those senior citizens who have given all that they had for us today. It is time for us to give them the benefits that they need so they do not ever have to have the kind of experience that that sweet lady did who was standing in front of me at the drugstore. That is why I came down here tonight, to join Congressman Gingrey and speak directly to the American people and say, get out there and help, get out there and get yourself registered, or get somebody to help you get registered, because these benefits are important. There are occasions now where people say, right now, prescription drug benefits do not mean much to me. One never knows what is right down the road, and it is important that people get registered now and have those benefits available. Because in the month of May, they may come down with something where they have got a permanent situation where for the rest of their life they are going to be taking medicine, and if they had not gotten registered, then they would be in a scramble trying to get registered. So it is important to look at it now. Mr. Speaker, one of the things that I think is most important as we sit here this evening is to encourage our seniors and their families to assist our seniors to get out and learn about the program and get signed up. Getting signed up is what it is all about. Trained professionals are available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week at 1-800- Medicare. They have got a Web site, and I am reading from Congressman Gingrey's sign, www.Medicare.gov, for those high-tech seniors, who are probably better at that than I am, to get out there and do this on-line. There is a lot of help available. I hope that that lady who was standing in line in front of me in the drugstore in Round Rock, Texas, I hope she hears, by accident or whatever, channel surfing, and tunes into this show tonight and will say ``I had better go do that.'' I think our colleagues on both sides of the aisle are going to be out in our districts talking to people and saying do not let something new keep you away. Get out there and get involved and get signed up.

Mr. CARTER

Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding to me, and I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) for putting together this opportunity to honor those who serve our Nation in the war on terror. I am up here speaking for the people of the 31st Congressional District of Texas. How does the 31st Congressional District of Texas have credibility to speak on behalf of these efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan? I would like to tell you a little bit about our credibility. The first American soldier killed in combat in the war on terror is from Georgetown Texas, which is 5 miles from my home; and every death in this war is absolutely critical to Americans. So counting numbers, every number counts. But the 2,000th death also took place, this famous 2,000th death that everybody in the press was just salivating to see happen, it seemed to me, he was also from the 31st district, Killeen, Texas. The people of the 31st district, from Stevensville, Texas to Round Rock, Texas, support our war, support our troops, and support our efforts in the war on terror. The people of the 31st district know we were attacked in the most vicious attack that has ever been done on the homeland in the history of the United States in our country, and we have retaliated in force and effectively and done our job. And who has done that job? Our 31st district's III Corps went over there. Fourth Infantry Division went over there and captured Saddam Hussein. The First Cavalry Division went over and ran a perfect election and protected people as they went out and, as we have heard tonight, exercised their right to vote. We have committed two full divisions to this war, and the Fourth ID is on its way back right now as we speak. I have been able to go over when both my divisions have been over there, and I promised General Thurmond and the that guys I talked to about 2 months ago, I am coming back just as quick as I can get over there right after the first of the year, because these are the finest human beings that have ever taken up arms on behalf of our country. For those people to talk about cutting and running, Americans do not cut and run. You know, this House has a shame on it when they turned on our soldiers in Vietnam, and I take that position and I am not backing off of it. The liberal press shamed a great generation of people who did their duty then and we, cannot afford to allow that to happen again for political expediency so someone can possibly use the war to gain political advantage in the United States. We are at war with evil people who intend to do harm to American citizens, wherever American citizens live or breathe or walk the street. We are unsafe with terrorism on the street, we are unsafe in our Nation and in every other nation on Earth because it is an evil cancer that can only be taken out by noble men and women who are willing to stand up on the wall and say we will fight for freedom, not only the freedom of Americans, but the freedom of the people that they are intimidating with their terrorism wherever they may appear. And I am telling you, we have got soldiers that have been willing to do that and have done the job well. I remember when I was in Afghanistan, the story I love to tell about a 20-year-old sitting looking at a screen of a film of a drone that was broadcasting pictures from the desert. And while we were there, he went to his commander and said, Sir, there is a bunch of camels crossing out there in a part where there should not be any camels. And I thought, how does this kid know there are not supposed to be any camels in this part of the country? He said, I think there are people underneath those camels. Three Blackhawk helicopters launched about 180 miles away. We were 180 miles from this location. And they caught nine Taliban crawling across the desert under the bellies of camels. My whole point of that story is: What kind of great, intelligent, smart kids are we sending over there and they are putting their lives in harm's way? This was a smart kid, a computer operator running a drone, able to know the knowledge of the country, to know where our enemy might be hiding. We have got the best of the absolute best over there, the same kind of people that you run into when you go to Iraq and you talk to these kids. I talked to a 20-year-old African American kid. We were having supper. He was from my district, and we have got a lot of them from my district. And I said, ``Son, have you had any hot spots that you have been in over here?'' And he said, ``Yeah. Yesterday we were in a convoy. They made the mistake of shooting at us.'' He said, ``They will not make that mistake again, sir.'' He said, ``When they stand and fight, they lose.'' Our young men and women are doing a fabulous job, and there is shame on anyone in this country who turns on these noble people who are standing up for the freedom of the people in Iraq and Afghanistan and the freedom of the United States of America. They are heroes. Today, I am very proud to say that one of the first people in my district to be wounded, seriously wounded, Allen Babbin, he has undergone close to 200 surgeries from a round that he took, winning the Bronze Star for pulling another wounded soldier off a bridge in the second day in Baghdad. Today, he flew back home; and he is on his way to full recovery because of the great work of the Army, Navy, and Air Force in getting him to the right kind of treatment. Everybody is working the right way in this job, and we bring shame upon ourselves, and those who would criticize these young men and women and the job they are doing bring shame upon themselves, and I am sorry for it. We in America must remember: If we do not fight tyranny wherever tyranny exists, we have learned this lesson over and over and over in American history, and if we do not support those who fight tyranny wherever tyranny exists, then tyranny will take over that map until tyranny controls the world. There will not just be no freedom in Iraq or no freedom in Afghanistan. There will not be any freedom anywhere. Not even in the cradle of American liberty will there be freedom. What this is about, Mr. Speaker, is the ability of Americans and others in this world to live the kind of life that everybody wants to live, raise their kids, have a job, eat dinner at night without fearing somebody blowing them up, walk the streets. It is for all the world that we stand in the gap, not just for Americans, not just for Afghans, not just for Iraqis or others in the Middle East. It is for the world that these young men and women stand in the gap. I am very proud on behalf of the people of the 31st Congressional District of Texas to tell you that we stand tall on behalf of our soldiers. We know they are the best of the best, and they will win the war on terror because it is the right thing to do. Lastly, we pray God's blessing on each and every one of them and each and every family that is also courageously allowing their family member to do the job that has to be done to keep freedom alive and well in this country. So this is all about us. It is all about the best of the best. God bless every one of them.

Mr. CARTER

Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, the Supreme Court of the United States made one of the worst opinions it has ever made in its history in Kelo v. The City of New London when they announced that they would allow other private individuals to use eminent domain to seize private property to enhance tax dollars for a community. Mr. Speaker, this is a taking of property totally outside of the Constitution of the United States. I have tried hundreds of these cases. No one is happy when their property is taken; but they realize they are taken for schools, it is taken for highways. Even a highway they want, they do not like to see their property taken. But now we have got a law that says that they can come in because it makes more money for a community. Mr. Speaker, this is an abomination that we will address this week in this House. It is overtime to address it. I urge my colleagues to join hands across the aisle and stop this horrible taking of property that is the result of this Supreme Court activist opinion.

Mr. CARTER

Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, as a State district judge for over 20 years in Texas, I presided over my fair share of frivolous lawsuits. I have seen firsthand the effect they have on small businesses and families. The current tort system is costing Americans over $200 million a year. Small businesses rank the cost and availability of liability insurance as second only to the cost of health care as their top priority. Both problems are fueled by frivolous lawsuits. Frivolous lawsuits make small businesses and workers suffer. This year the Nation's oldest ladder manufacturer, family-owned John S. Tilley Ladders Company of New York, filed for bankruptcy protection and sold off most of its assets due to litigation costs. Founded in 1855, the Tilley firm could not handle the cost of liability insurance, which had risen from 6 percent of sales a decade ago to 29 percent, even though the company never lost an actual court judgment. ``We could see the handwriting on the wall and just want to end this whole thing,'' said Robert Howland, a descendant of the founder, John Tilley. Mr. Speaker, let us put an end to frivolous lawsuits that are ruining the American Dream.

Mr. CARTER

Mr. CARTER. Madam Speaker, I rise this evening to talk about an ongoing crisis that is in this country, a crisis in the courts of America. People are using the third branch of this government as an abusive form of receiving money from the court system, in many instances just because they file a lawsuit. People are using the courts of America to intimidate others out of their constitutional rights because of the expense of litigation. Most importantly, and what I rise today for, they are driving the medical profession into the ground. Madam Speaker, I have spent 21 years of my life working with fine lawyers in a courtroom. I have seen the courtroom and how things work in the courtroom change substantially in that 21 years on the bench as a trial judge in Texas. The courts were designed for people to seek recourse when they were damaged. The courts were designed to grant fairness to all parties involved. The courts were not designed to use the economic expense of litigation to force people to settle lawsuits or to force people to pay money. They were designed for a fair presentation of the evidence and a fair decision to be rendered by the trier of facts and the trier of the law. Yet, today, in modern society, we see in every area courts being used to try to force someone to do something contrary to their best interests, to pay when, in reality, the only reason they are paying is because, quite frankly, it is cheaper than fighting the litigation, cheaper for insurance claims to be settled, because it is easier to settle an accident than actually stand up for what is right. We see this, and if the spotlight is placed upon this, we see what it is doing to our medical profession. Madam Speaker, we love to all sit around and reminisce about the old country doctor who would actually make house calls. The doctor that would make a house call with a little black bag today probably ought to be seriously examined for being crazy, because if all he brings is the resources of that bag to make that house call, surely there is a lawyer some place that is going to sue him for something because he said he did not do the right thing. So what is happening to our legal profession? In many instances, doctors will tell us, unnecessary tests are being required of our patients. The cost of our medical care in this country is skyrocketing not because maybe that doctor thinks he may know what is wrong with that patient, but he also wants to make sure that he has that MRI and that CAT scan on record to confirm what his diagnosis is. Why? Because of the trial lawyers standing outside the door, ready to sue him for the slightest thing because he thinks he can prove that that test was not right. Madam Speaker, we have women in south Texas that cannot find a baby doctor to deliver their baby and cannot find a pediatrician to care for their baby when it is born. Patients in south Texas cannot find a neurologist or a neurosurgeon when someone has been in a car wreck and has a brain injury and desperately needs someone that can treat them, either a neurologist or a neurosurgeon. There are people that are being hauled all the way from the Rio Grande Valley, Brownsville, and McAllen, all the way to San Antonio to try to find a neurologist that will take care of a serious, serious case. Madam Speaker, this is a crisis in America. I am just looking at Texas. But this is not just new to Texas; this is all over the country. There are multiple States that are in crisis when it comes to medical liability. Tonight, I am up here and I am joined by many of my colleagues to talk about H.R. 5, the Help Efficient, Assessible, Low- cost, Timely Health Care Act of 2005 entitled HEALTH. This is sponsored by my colleague, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey), a medical doctor and a good friend from the State of Georgia, and I am sure that he will join us here in just a little while. Right now, he is with the Committee on Rules, and that is why he is not the first one to talk, because he is the doctor. But he will tell us, as I will tell my colleagues and my colleagues will tell us, this crisis in America is causing skyrocketing medical costs, unfair jury verdicts and judgments against the doctors of this country and causing doctors to say, I am not doing this anymore. Madam Speaker, when we drive out the people who are there to protect our lives, when we drive them away with these frivolous and sometimes onerous, most of the time onerous lawsuits, we are driving away people that are there to save our lives. Nobody asks when they are dragged into the emergency room after a terrible car wreck where the jaws of life have pried them out of the car, they do not ask, where is my lawyer, they are looking for a doctor. Yet, I have talked personally with emergency room surgeons, and they tell me that their profession is getting thinner and thinner and thinner every day. In fact, most of the people that still are willing to go and be emergency room surgeons are the guys who love to live on the edge with that adrenaline rush, because they certainly are not doing it because they feel safe. They deal constantly with the fear of a lawsuit because they did the right thing to save a life. Doctors deliver babies. That is what we all expect. We want a doctor to be there with our wonderful spouse when they give us the gift of a child. Why do we want that doctor there? We want that doctor there to make sure that child is healthy and to make sure that birth is as successful as possible and make sure mama comes home with the baby. Yet, with the amount of lawsuits that are attacking our OBGYNs in America, more and more of our outstanding doctors are finding something else to do. Madam Speaker, this is a crisis in America. The gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey), the sponsor of H.R. 5, I believe offers us the solution to that crisis. I see that he has joined us, and I am going to yield to him to talk to us about this issue.

Mr. CARTER. Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Dr. Murphy).

Mr. CARTER. Madam Speaker, at this time we are joined by the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn), one of our wonderful colleagues, a real asset to this House, and at this time I yield to the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn).

Mr. CARTER

Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, the State of Texas has demonstrated to the world that they opened their arms to the evacuees of the 2 hurricanes that struck our Nation and brought disaster to a great area of the Gulf Coast. Texas has always opened their arms to their neighbors and said, come to Texas, you are welcome. But, Mr. Speaker, we have a problem on the Texas border. I was down in Laredo, Mexico, and Del Rio, Texas, recently where 42 American citizens have been kidnapped. I have a photograph of a woman who was burned alive, an American citizen, by these criminals who cross freely across our borders of Texas. We say, welcome, in Texas, but when you come here, do not break the law to get here. It is time for border security in this bill. I rise in support of this rule and this homeland security appropriation bill because we start down the road to providing safe borders for the entire southern border and northern border of the United States. We add 1,000 Border Patrol men, which will be of great assistance in shutting down this criminal activity and all of this illegal behavior of people coming illegally into our Nation. Mr. Speaker, 68,000 OTMs, Other Than Mexicans, have crossed within the last 8 months. That is a crisis. We have to do something about the borders, and this bill does that. We have new agents for the Border Patrol. We have new criminal investigators, we have new investigators for immigration and for ICE. We have provided a great start on a secure border. We will continue to work hard to secure the borders of this country so that this illegal behavior will be caught and punished and these people will be turned back, because, Mr. Speaker, our Nation's security depends upon it. So I am very supportive of this bill, and I ask for a ``yes'' vote on the rule and a ``yes'' vote on this bill, because it is a vote for a secure border for America.

Mr. CARTER

Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers) and the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Sabo) for their hard work on this conference report. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this, because I view the world from the State of Texas. I look at the largest single foreign border in the United States in Texas. I look at a port that the Coast Guard told me carries the largest amount of dangerous cargo in the United States, and possibly the largest amount of dangerous cargo on Earth, the port of Houston. I look at the big spaces we have to cover as we try to secure just the State of Texas. I look at the 68,000 other-than-Mexican immigrants that we have actually caught in the last 8 months crossing the Texas border. These are people from places other than Mexico: Central and South America, Eastern Europe, Russia, the Middle East, Syrians, Iranians, Iraqis, Chinese and Far Easterners, crossing our border across the Rio Grande River. I view that world, and it is a world that requires a secure homeland. Mr. Speaker, there has been a lot of hard work done on this bill, and I think this bill goes a long way to start securing the Texas border and the rest of the border between the United States and Mexico and the United States and Canada. We are adding 1,000 border patrol agents by this bill; we are putting on investigators; we are beefing up ICE. We are doing everything we can to say to the world, We are not anti- immigrant; we are anti-people who break the law to enter our country or who are coming in illegally. Mr. Speaker, this bill will help, so I stand in support of this bill, because it does the right thing for America.