John Doolittle

Mr. DOOLITTLE

Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I held a meeting recently with many of our key law enforcement people in my part of northern California to help identify reasonable and constitutional ways in which Congress can assist them in their fight against violent crime in our communities. Not surprisingly, many of them pointed to California's increasing problem with illegal immigration as an issue they felt deserved Congress' immediate attention. I am pleased to see that H.R. 2703 has taken major steps in addressing the problem of illegal immigration by specifically focusing on the deportation of criminal aliens from our country. However, I feel that the bill fails to address a critical problem associated with criminal aliens, and that is the fact that almost all of those deported eventually find their way back to our country with a potential of committing crimes again. In California alone, the INS deports thousands of illegal immigrants every year who have committed felonies in our State, and every year thousands of those same criminal aliens return back again. In fact, the California Department of Justice recently reported that 98 percent of all immigrants who are deported for committing felonies in California will eventually return to the State, and of those, 40 percent will commit crimes again. Unfortunately, this epidemic is not unique to urban areas, but has started to infest rural America as well. Just a few years ago, in the small rural community of Lincoln, which is located in my district, an illegal alien was found guilty of a driveby shooting, which was the first driveby shooting ever in that area. After spending a short time in prison, the criminal alien was deported out of the country by the INS. Now, despite his deportation, he returned to the area after only 1 week and, without hesitation, committed another crime. With such a threat to our public safety posed by criminal aliens, one would think that we would give law enforcement all the tools it needs to remove these criminals from our streets, but unfortunately just the opposite is true. In fact, the Federal Government has tied the hands of our State and local law enforcement officials by actually prohibiting them from doing their job of protecting public safety. I was dismayed to learn that the current Federal law prohibits State and local law enforcement officials from arresting and detaining criminal aliens whom they encountered through their routine duties. In fact, a low re-entry into the United States by deported aliens was considered a felony. Our State and local law enforcement officers are only permitted to release the felon and contact the INS with the details of the incident. Mr. Chairman, current Federal law in this area places our communities at risk and has led me to offer this amendment to H.R. 2703, an amendment I feel will help put some sense back into our laws dealing with the reentry of criminal aliens into this country. My amendment would also permit State and local law enforcement officials to assist the INS by granting them the authority in their normal course of duty to arrest and detain criminal aliens until the INS can properly take them into Federal custody. With my amendment, law enforcement officials would no longer be required to release known dangerous felons back into our communities. Instead, this amendment would give those with the responsibility of protecting our public safety the ability to take a known criminal alien off our streets and put him behind bars. Mr. Chairman, you will be interested to know that shortly before my district was victimized for the second time by this criminal alien I spoke of earlier, an area police officer actually stopped him for a traffic violation. With my amendment the police officer would have been able to put him in jail for being back in the country illegally until the INS could take him into Federal custody. Without it, the officer had to release him, and our area became the victim of yet another crime. My amendment is supported by our local law enforcement because they know that fighting illegal immigration can no longer be left solely to Federal agencies. Let us untie the hands of those we ask to protect us and include my amendment in H.R. 2703 today. Mr. Chairman, by way of summary, I would like to allay fears or concerns that Members may have about the scope of my amendment. First, my amendment does not require anything of State and local law enforcement. There is no Federal mandate. The provision I seek to add would merely authorize local law enforcement agencies to hold the criminal alien until the INS has taken him back into Federal custody. Secondly, my amendment is very narrow and only covers situations in which the State or local officer encounters criminal aliens within his routine duties. In addition, the subject can only be held if the State or local police have obtained appropriate confirmation from the INS of the illegal status of the individual. Only confirmed criminal aliens are at risk of being taken into custody. In closing, Mr. Chairman, I think my amendment represents commonsense reform. It is narrow in scope but will help mightily people on the ground who have the primary responsibility of keeping our children and families safe from crime.

Mr. DOOLITTLE. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. DOOLITTLE. As do I, Mr. Chairman. We will proceed ahead.

Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Chairman, let me say to the gentleman that I would be delighted to work with him on this issue. Obviously, the primary responsibility for dealing with the control of our borders rests with the Federal Government. Representing California, we have had a number of problems getting, really, reimbursed for the costs that have been incurred. On this amendment I bring today, the intent is to give the option to local law enforcement. It really came at the suggestion of one of our local police departments within the city of Roseville, which has had problems in this area, and the others who were there felt that this made perfect sense. The gentleman is correct, of course, that if they detain an illegal, there will be some additional expense involved with the processing of that. They seemed willing, at least at this point, to incur that. But I would be more than happy to work with the gentleman to see if there is a way we can help the Government to live up to its primary responsibility of dealing with the control of our borders

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

Mr. DOOLITTLE

Mr. DOOLITTLE. If I may add, typically this situation arises when they have stopped an individual for a traffic offense, and in the course of running the check this pops up. So that is kind of the normal circumstance when it would occur.

Mr. DOOLITTLE. If the gentleman will yield further, they are authorized to arrest and detain, but only after they have obtained confirmation from the INS. So they would have to call into the INS and get their confirmation that indeed this person is a criminal alien.

Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that during further consideration of the bill H.R. 2703, pursuant to House Resolution 380, I may be permitted to offer the amendment numbered 7 in House Report 104-480 out of the specified order and immediately following amendment No. 15. I spoke with the ranking minority member about this, and he indicated that he would have no objection.

Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Speaker, the estimates we were given--they did not--a couple of amendments were dropped before us, and they did not hold a vote on one of them, so, yes, I was not here and I could not get over in time. I was here, but I just missed it by the time we got here.

Mr. DOOLITTLE

Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Speaker, today's Washington Post contains the following headline, ``About Face, Clinton To Restore Staff He Cut From Antidrug Office.'' First paragraph reads: Moving full circle in this election year, President Clinton plans an ambitious upgrading of White House drug control policy office, 3 years after virtually wiping out that office. Mr. Speaker, a recent survey shows huge increases in drug use amongst our children. Not only is there increasing drug use, but the average age at which children first use drugs is now age 13. Mr. Speaker, the President has pursued a policy of appeasement in the war on drugs. He has cut drug enforcement programs. As Members heard, he has, in fact, been AWOL in the war on drugs. And now, in an election year, he has decided to do something about it. Mr. Speaker, it is truly tragic that our children have been allowed to suffer for 3 years while the President was pursuing his true priorities.

Mr. DOOLITTLE

Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R 2606 to prohibit the unauthorized use of Defense Department funds for peacekeeping in Bosnia. Although I supported the Buyer-McHale resolution last month, that resolution was nonbinding and does not have the effect of law. President Clinton said publicly that passage of the Buyer resolution will not have ``any effect'' on the current settlement negotiations in Dayton. I had pushed to include binding language in the fiscal year 1996 Department of Defense appropriations conference report, but H.R. 2606, if passed, will achieve the same objective; it will prohibit troop deployment until Congress has authorized such a deployment. The arguments against this bill and the timing of this vote are simply misguided: This prohibition is not premature. We cannot wait. It would be more irresponsible to cut off funds after the troops are already committed. Such action is not unconstitutional. The President does have the power as Commander-in-Chief to send troops abroad, but Congress has the constitutional authority to appropriate funds for the deployment of troops--or not appropriate funds. This legislation will not hurt the peace process. Rather, it will prevent the President from making commitments the American people do not want to fulfill. We are not tying the President's hands. If he makes a compelling case to the American people that 25,000 American service men and women are needed to enforce a peace agreement in Bosnia, Congress will authorize the funds for such a deployment. Mr. Speaker, I welcome a debate on whether or not the United States should send ground troops to Bosnia. But until that debate occurs, and until I am convinced that sending American men and women to Bosnia is the proper course of action, I intend to do everything in my power to keep us out of that civil war. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2606.

Mr. DOOLITTLE

Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would like to thank the gentleman from California [Mr. Miller] for his support on this. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Speaker, the primary intent of H.R. 1743 is to extend the authorization for the State Water Resources Research Institutes. Through the act, the institutes have established a Federal/ State partnership in water resources, education, and information transfer. There are 54 of these institutes located at the land grant university in each of the 50 States and several of the territories. These institutes are a primary link between the academic community, the water-related personnel in Federal and State government, and the private sector. The institutes provide a mechanism for promoting State, regional, and national coordination of water resources research and training. They also serve as a network to facilitate research coordination and information transfer. Their programs are coordinated with the general guidance of the Secretary of the Interior. This is a popular program because research from the water institutes is often directed at finding solutions to water problems that have local and regional relevance. Research results from the program are often applied to real-world problems in water management. H.R. 1743 would expand the act's findings and focus on the need for long-term planning and policy development, support for States in water resources management, and maintaining productivity of natural resources and agricultural systems. H.R. 1743 sets forth new requirements for the Interior Department to coordinate and cooperate with other departments and agencies of the Federal Government on water resources problems and requires an annual report on these efforts to Congress. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. DOOLITTLE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend spend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1743) to amend the Water Resources Research Act of 1984 to extend the authorizations of appropriations through fiscal year 2000, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. DOOLITTLE

Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 1743, the bill just passed.

Mr. DOOLITTLE

Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute.

Mr. DOOLITTLE

Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Chairman, I rise to support this very excellent legislation of the gentleman from California [Mr. Bono]. This legislation will enhance our system of checks and balances by establishing three-judge courts under limited circumstances, which are where injunctive relief has been requested regarding a voter approved initiative. As Thomas Jefferson said, Mr. Chairman, trust not to the good will of judges but bind them down by the chains of the Constitution. This bill takes us 10 steps in that direction.

Mr. DOOLITTLE. I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina.

Mr. DOOLITTLE. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, I am saying it [[Page H 9618]] takes 10 steps in the direction of Jefferson's quote because it gets three judges involved instead of one judge.

Mr. DOOLITTLE

Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to read into the Record two letters I received when I was in my district over the recess. Both letters touch upon how the policies being pursued by the Clinton administration are causing damage to the forests of northern California and inflicting pain and suffering on the residents of the region. The first letter is from Michael and Sharlene Reed of Sonora. The letter reads: Representative Doolittle: Due to the Forest Service interpretation of the Taylor Amendment and President Clinton's lack of concern for the working people we are recently unemployed. Our local plywood and sawmill operation has been closed. The Stanislaus National Forest will have no noticeable increase in timber sales in the foreseeable future. My family has been in Tuolumne County for more than 100 years, in the cattle and timber fields. We care about the future of our county, our state and our nation. For now our future is unknown, and we may have to leave the place that has been our home for such a long time. There are no other job opportunities available in this area. We may also lose our home because there is little real estate market at this time. Clinton's ``job retraining'' would only work if there were jobs to be trained for. While our future is uncertain, we hope your future as our Representative is secure. We will help any way we can. Sincerely, Michael and Sharlene Reed, Sonora, California. The second letter I would like to share was sent to the California Spotted Owl Team in Sacramento by Pat Kaunert. Mr. Kaunert, who is also a resident of Sonora, gave me a copy of the letter at a recent townhall meeting. His letter reads: Comments on California Spotted Owl Drafted Plan The following comments on the Draft California Owl Plan represent my personal opinion only, and are not intended to represent any other persons or agency. I have reviewed the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Management of the California Spotted Owl, a document which clearly states that ``The California spotted owl appears to be abundant and well-distributed within the forests on the west slope of the Sierra Nevada.'' This tells me that the owls are currently living in paradise--not endangered, not threatened, and not all that sensitive. I'm not all that sensitive. I'm not worried about the owls. This document tells me they're doing just fine for now. However, I am deeply concerned about the existence of several other species that remain unprotected by this plan-- the American logger, the American rancher, the professional forester, the wildland firefighter, local forest families, and the critical rural habitat in which they all live and work. Together, they comprise an essential component of the forest ecosystem, and contribute to the strength of our nation. They are the human critters that they have the experience, training, and commitment to sustain the overall health and productivity of the forest. Without immediate intervention it is likely they will go into dramatic decline, and possible extinction. Therefore, I recommend the following prescription as good medicine for these endangered human species, as well as for the western slope of the Sierras and its abundant wildlife: Scrap the ``cookie-cutter'', one-size-fits-all'' approach to managing forest vegetation. Return to individual Forest Plans that can provide a custom tailored fit to the specific local needs of rural communities, individual landscapes, and sustainable forests. Depart from past harvest schedules to commence an aggressive increase in the volume of forest tree-thinning. This will reduce the growing catastrophic fire hazard in dense, choked, and over crowed timber stands. Cut some bigger trees to make way for the younger ones. Step-up the reforestation effort on wildfire-burned forest land. This will reduce the brush field fire hazard, provide future jobs for rural communities, grow green forests in which Americans love to recreate, and provide habitat opportunities for a wider range of wildlife. Continue the good work of introducing controlled, cool fire back into the landscape to maintain thinned stands of trees and improve browse for wildlife. Combine this work with tree thinning over entire landscapes as needed to get out front on the California fire problem. Forests on the west slope of the Sierras are burning down faster than we can sustain them, resulting in big black clear cuts. Spotted owl nesting sites are torching off faster than the forest can grow them, and the owls are pretty mad about it. Let's protect the jobs of the people who can protect the owls. Mr. Speaker, whether the issue is the California Spotted Owl or the timber salvage amendment passed in the 1995 recissions bill, the Clinton administration continues to ignore the human and social costs of its policies. We are witnessing the devastation of entire communities in the northwestern United States as a result of the President's efforts to placate extremists in the environmental movement. These letters, Mr. Speaker, are representative of the thinking of the great majority of my constituents. They are beginning to speak out more forcefully against the current administration's destructive environmental policies and I have assured them that their voices will be heard in Washington. I am glad to share these two letters with my colleagues by including them in today's Record.

Mr. DOOLITTLE

Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Speaker, I have in the past supported the BRAC Commission process, viewing it as a reasonable way to effect the necessary downsizing of excess capacity. As the gentleman from California [Mr. Fazio] mentioned, I have been very involved with him, the gentleman from California [Mr. Matsui], the gentleman from California [Mr. Pombo], the gentleman from California [Mr. Herger], and others from our region in fighting for McClellan Air Force Base. I can tell you that the gentleman from Utah [Mr. Hansen] was right last year or the year before when he proposed cutting off the process after the first three rounds. I am sorry that we have gone to the fourth round. The fourth round has disappointed me. The idea that we somehow remove politics from the BRAC process, in my opinion, did not turn out to be the case. In fact, it reminds me of the method for selecting judges advocated by the American Bar Association throughout the country where all they do is shift the politics from the more open forum of the Governor, et cetera, and move it back behind closed doors where intense logrolling and politicking is going on. We should have had cross-servicing. That would have saved McClellan Air Force Base. It is a modern base capable of doing the job. But, no, despite the fact that every major panel has recommended cross- servicing, we do not have it. It is not part of our defense policy. It is a tragedy, Mr. Speaker. We should pass this resolution. We should go back to the drawing boards. We should get cross-servicing in as part of this, and if we are going to have politics in the process, then let us get it out in the open. Mr. Speaker, I must add I am disappointed in the President. The President told the gentleman from California [Mr. Fazio] and me of his keen awareness of how California has had 15 percent of the military personnel around the country and suffered 85 percent of the personnel reductions, and yet when the time came, when the one person that could have intervened to make a difference here could have exercised that, he did not. With the privatization we have got, even that is slipping. I intend to fight for that. I urge approval of this resolution.

Mr. DOOLITTLE

Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Speaker, I would like to salute the Mountain Fire/ Rescue 05018 Volunteer Fire Company from Calaveras County, CA, for their contributions and personal sacrifices in the humanitarian mission Operation SUPPORT HOPE to Goma, Zaire, in July 1994. These men saved an estimated 500,000 lives by ensuring that the Rwandan refugees in Zaire had fresh water to drink. The crew left California on July 23, 1994 and after an arduous 22.5 hour flight, they arrived in Goma, Zaire. From the moment they stepped off the plane, they were hard at work. It was a horrific sight. Dead bodies filled the road from the airfield to the pumping site at Lac Kivu. Before they could even begin pumping the fresh water needed to cure those with cholera, they had to clear the area around the lake. Human remains littered the entire area. The men encountered many dangers. Cholera was everywhere and it was reported that 80% of the population was HIV-positive. As if disease were not a sufficiently dangerous adversary, the crew also had to worry about the Zairian soldiers who were continuously firing their AK47 assault rifles and throwing hand grenades at them. The crew gave little thought to their personal safety, however, as they continued to work. It was necessary to clear a spot 20 yards into the lake and 100 yards wide along the shore in order to begin pumping the water. The crew had to maneuver around dead bodies as well as abandoned AK47's and hand grenades. Within four hours, they had made all of the preparations necessary to begin the pumping process. For the next 32 days, they worked tirelessly for 18 hours per day. They had a subpump, firetruck, and 14 water tenders. The water tenders, which were sent by the United Nations, were used to transport the water from the lake to a nearby village. However, when they arrived, they were filled with diesel fuel. The men had to clean out the tanks so that they would be safe for transporting water. The main tool used to accomplish this amazing feat has an interesting story all its own. The subpump, which was on loan from Redwood City, CA, is the only one of its kind in the United States. This pump can pump 1,250 gallons per minute (gpm) at 120 pounds per square inch (psi) and can push water through a 5" fire hose up higher than 160 feet. The subpump can continuously pump large amounts of water. This subpump is the same piece of equipment that pumped contaminated water 24 hours a day for 30 days, aerating and ridding Shasta Lake of its toxicity after the toxic waste spill. It is with great pleasure that I recognize the Mountain Fire/Rescue members who assisted in Operation SUPPORT HOPE. They are: Chief John Horner, Matthew Blackburn, Derrick Bruham, John Conway, Jack Pacheco, Frank Blackburn, William Dunn, and Dan Molly. I would also like to recognize the many support volunteers of Mountain Fire/Rescue who made it possible for these men to respond so quickly. The men and women of Mountain Fire/Rescue have demonstrated the true American spirit in giving of themselves to help others in need. Their dedication should serve as an inspiration to us all.

Mr. DOOLITTLE

Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Chairman, the other side would have us believe this is really a debate about the fairness of who can get the abortions and under what circumstances. I do not think it is appropriate to even get into that. The fact of the matter is, the Hyde amendment, the existing law, allowed States to use their money to provide abortions in the case of rape or incest. It did not require it. But our liberals here want to require it, because they believe in the result. We are a Federal system of laws with 50 sovereign States. This amendment, resisting this amendment will preserve what the existing law is. Supporting the gentleman from Oklahoma [Mr. Istook] will in fact recognize the sovereignty of the States. Those States' citizens, many of them have determined under what conditions their tax money is to be used to provide abortions. It is not right that we should sit here in Washington with a command and control directive from the top telling them what they should do. This amendment of Mr. Istook makes clear that States can fund these programs according to their laws. That is the position that we as a body should uphold. I would ask for Members support for the gentleman from Oklahoma, [Mr. Istook].