David Dreier

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the amendment I am offering with my friends Mr. Kolbe and Chairman Lewis to reauthorize the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program. Illegal immigration is a critical federal responsibility and a serious local problem. Local law enforcement are on the front lines when it comes to keeping neighborhoods safe from illegal immigrants who commit crimes. Our officers are forced to shoulder the added burden of punishing undocumented individuals who endanger our communities. The SCAAP program is designed to fulfill the federal government's responsibility to reimburse states and localities for the significant costs they incur when jailing illegal aliens. Passage of this amendment will demonstrate our unwavering support for local law enforcement as they uphold the law and protect our communities. This amendment authorizes $750 million for SCAAP in fiscal year 2006, $850 million for 2007, and $950 million for each of fiscal years 2008- 2011. While significant, this money represents only a fraction of the true costs incurred by state and local governments. California alone spends more than $750 million each year to jail criminal illegal aliens. The amendment also adds an additional measure of accountability and oversight to the SCAAP program. It requires the DOJ Inspector General to report to Congress on how effectively jurisdictions that receive SCAAP funding are cooperating with the Department of Homeland Security on deporting criminal aliens. Clearly, it is a national security priority and a local necessity to deport criminal aliens. This measure will help keep the federal focus on securing the borders, right where it should be. It is also important to note that the SCAAP program is not only critical for border states, such as California and Arizona, which Mr. Kolbe, Mr. Lewis and I are privileged to represent. States with the highest growth in illegal immigrants include North Carolina and Iowa. SCAAP has assisted all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. Let's stand with our local law enforcement and support robust funding for SCAAP. Support the Kolbe/Dreier/Lewis amendment.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I rise this afternoon to talk about a very important issue which, frankly, has not gotten a great deal of attention and that is the growth of the U.S. economy and what it is we have been able to see over the past several weeks and months. Virtually everyone has acknowledged the fact that Hurricane Katrina was, if not the worst, one of the worst natural disasters to hit the United States of America, and we all know that in the wake of that disaster where we saw the tragic loss of life and, of course, the devastation of property along the gulf coast, we assumed that there would be a very, very deleterious effect on the U.S. economy. Today, we received what is news that is not what you would call overwhelmingly positive, but certainly not news that was anything like what had been anticipated. Today, we received the news that following the tragedy of Hurricane Katrina there has been a net job loss based on the payroll survey, which is the old survey structure that has been put into place to determine the jobless rate in the country, a payroll jobs rate reduction of 35,000 nationwide. Madam Speaker, I think it is important to note that many economists had predicted that that job loss number was going to be in excess of 200,000 in the wake of the tragedy of Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita. I think it is important to also recognize that as we focus attention from the United States Congress and the State and local officials, the President of the United States, focus on reconstruction, dealing with the tragic circumstances in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, one of the most important things we can do is to make sure that the entire U.S. economy continues to grow as boldly and as dynamically as possible. Let us look at the policies that we have seen put into place that have led to tremendous economic growth. We saw throughout the year of 2004 gross domestic product growth of 4.4 percent, a very positive sign of growth. This year, the number has not been quite as high, about 3.3 percent on average of GDP growth. So we have gone through the 15th quarter of positive economic growth, a very, very good indicator of what we can do as a Nation to help address the needs of those who have been victimized by this natural disaster. One of the things that has happened is we have seen many people from that region obviously find job opportunities in other parts of the Nation. I was in my original hometown of Kansas City, Missouri, just a few weeks ago, and I met a man who said he had worked at Brennan's Restaurant in New Orleans, and he is now working in a food service capacity in Kansas City. Obviously, economic growth in other parts of the country played a role in creating opportunities for people who were subjected to that horrible natural disaster. So, Madam Speaker, one of the things that we have got to do is make sure that we continue to keep in place our very positive, pro-growth, pro-trade, pro-economic opportunity policies. Now, what are those policies? Those policies obviously consist of tax reduction. Tax reduction has stimulated the economy and, in fact, as we all know, generated a level of revenues to the Federal Treasury that exceeded expectations. In fact, it exceeded expectations to the point where we have now received $94 billion in unanticipated revenues to the Federal Treasury, reducing the deficit projection from the February projection by, as I said, $94 billion. Madam Speaker, that is a very positive sign. It is not a Republican number that I am offering. That is a number that has come from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. Again, it is tax cuts that have brought about this positive, positive economic growth. Unfortunately, many of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle during 2001, 2002, 2003, said if we cut taxes we are going to send the U.S. economy right into the dumpster and we will send the deficit sky- high. Time and time again, many of my friends and I would appear on different programs, and that was what I heard, over and over and over again: Any kind of tax cut is going to exacerbate the deficit and ruin the U.S. economy. Madam Speaker, we have found the exact opposite to be the case. Similarly, as we look at the trade issue, 94 percent of the world's consumers are outside of our U.S. borders. We need to do everything that we can to continue to open up new markets for U.S. goods and services. We have put into place positive trade and growth policies, and those policies are, I am very happy to say, helping the United States of America and creating opportunity for even those victims of the tragedies on the gulf coast.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take the 5 minutes that the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton) would have had.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Con. Res. 248, honoring the life of Simon Wiesenthal, and thank my good friend, the gentleman from California, Mr. Waxman, for authoring this important resolution. We were all saddened to hear recently that Mr. Wiesenthal passed away at the age of 96. Mr. Wiesenthal overcame great trials to become one of the few fortunate enough to survive the slaughter of 6 million people during the Holocaust. He did not escape unscathed as, tragically, 89 members of his family perished at the hands of the Nazis. Almost immediately upon being liberated by an American military unit on May 5, 1945, Mr. Wiesenthal dedicated his life to tracking down and bringing to justice Nazi war criminals. Initially working for the Army's Office of Strategic Services and Counter-Intelligence Corps, and later operating the Jewish Historical Documentation Center in Vienna, Mr. Wiesenthal is credited with obtaining the information necessary to apprehend more than 1,100 war criminals. As Rabbi Marvin Hier, Dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, described him, ``Simon Wiesenthal was the conscience of the Holocaust.'' Among the most egregious mass murderers that he helped apprehend was Adolf Eichman, who, as a member of the Gestapo, supervised the execution of the Jewish ``Final Solution.'' Mr. Wiesenthal also was responsible for aiding in the captures of Karl Silberbauer, the Gestapo officer who arrested Anne Frank; Franz Stangl, the commandant of the Treblinka and Sobibor concentration camps in Poland; and Hermine Braunsteiner, who supervised the killings of hundreds of children and who had found refuge in the United States. Mr. Speaker, while Mr. Wiesenthal devoted the majority of his life to bringing Nazi criminals to justice, he did so not out of the need for revenge, but the need for atonement. Mr. Wiesenthal's goal was to bring these genocidal crimes out of the shadows. He felt a duty to those who had died to ensure that the memory of what had transpired would not be forgotten. He also felt a duty to teach future generations the lessons of the past so that they would not be repeated. Simon Wiesenthal Centers span the globe, and are valuable venues to teach America's youth about tolerance and understanding, as well as this important lesson: evil men can perpetuate ghastly crimes when the world chooses to permit it. Mr. Speaker, only one who had witnessed such atrocities could shoulder the burden and carry the respect necessary to continue this quest for justice over so many decades. While Mr. Wiesenthal's friends and family sacrificed their lives in the death camps of the Nazis, Mr. Wiesenthal sacrificed his life to ensuring their memories would live forever. In his memoirs, Mr. Wiesenthal quotes what one Nazi officer told him late in World War II, ``You would tell the truth [about the concentration camps] to the people in America. And you know what would happen, Wiesenthal? They wouldn't believe you. They'd say you were mad. Might even put you into an asylum. How can anyone believe this terrible business--unless he has lived through it?'' Mr. Speaker, Simon Wiesenthal lived through it. He made us believe it. And we will never forget it. That will be his eternal legacy.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding, and I appreciate his hard work on this and his very strong commitment to our Nation's homeland security. In the last Congress he served very ably as a member of the authorizing committee on homeland security. I also want to join in expressing my appreciation, Mr. Speaker, to the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis) and the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers) who worked very hard on this, and for the bipartisan spirit of consideration of this measure. As the gentleman from Massachusetts correctly said, this is going to enjoy strong bipartisan support. Why? Because we all know that there must be a focus on our Nation's homeland security. It is part of our national security; and, frankly, Mr. Speaker, a very important part of our national security happens to be border security. One of the things included in this measure, of which I am particularly proud, is a measure that in the last Congress, I worked with our former colleague, Mr. Ose of Sacramento on, and my colleagues from California, Mr. Hunter, Mr. Cunningham and others have spent a great deal of time working on this, that is, we provide $35 million for completion of the 3\1/2\-mile gap in the border fence. Earlier this week, I had the opportunity to be right on the border near that gap. It is an area known as Smugglers' Gulch. It is an area where people have illegally entered this country, and they have pummeled the environment. The notion of completing that 3\1/2\-mile gap is going to go a long way towards dealing with our border security concern, number one, and, number two, our environmental concerns in the area. I also have to say, having spent a great deal of time with our border patrol agents on the border just a few days ago, I am particularly proud of the hard work they put in their job. They want to have the ability to do their job. Right now they spend most of their time and energy coming to this country simply seeking an opportunity to feed their families. We need to ensure that they have the ability to focus on criminals and potential terrorists. That is exactly what we want to do. That is one of the other reasons that we, in this bill, have increased by 1,000, adding to the 500 already provided in the earlier supplemental appropriations bill, 1,000 additional border patrol agents. I hope that will help us turn the corner. I am convinced that it will. The overall commitment to homeland security is one which has, I believe, been very adequately addressed in this important measure. I urge my colleagues to provide strong bipartisan support for this effort.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding me this time, and I thank him for his very important work on this vital piece of legislation. I rise to support the rule and the underlying legislation and to begin by praising the gentleman from California (Mr. Pombo), the very distinguished chairman, for all of the effort that he has put in to assembling a bipartisan compromise on this. I will say I am somewhat disturbed with what I just heard from the gentleman from California (Mr. Cardoza) that 90 percent of this legislation was, in fact, crafted by Democratic staff. But I will say that if it embraces the core Republican goals that the gentleman from California (Mr. Pombo) is pursuing, I still will be supportive of it. But I think that that is demonstration of the fact that we are working in a bipartisan way and the gentleman from California (Mr. Pombo) has demonstrated his willingness to do just that. When I think about the long struggle which the gentleman from California (Mr. Pombo) has been involved in for a decade to try to bring about reform of the Endangered Species Act, I think back to one of the challenges that we have in Southern California, and the gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert), who has worked long and hard on this, represents part of Riverside County, and I recounted up in the Committee on Rules yesterday the fact that dealing with the Stephens' kangaroo rat, an endangered species, we had conflicting directives that came from government. The fire department in Riverside County said you should clear the brush away from your homes to ensure that you do not face the threat of fire. The County of Riverside said to comply with the Endangered Species Act we would be jeopardizing the Stephens' kangaroo rat's life. And, by the way, the Stephens' kangaroo rat had been found in great numbers later in Texas, but we would jeopardize that if you did clear the brush away from your home. What happened? To their benefit, many people who followed the directive of the fire department, their homes were saved; and, of course, those who did not tragically lost their homes because of fire. We right now in Southern California are dealing with tremendous fire problems in that area; and, frankly, I do believe that the kind of reform that is going to be assembled in a bipartisan way on the Endangered Species Act will go a long way toward preserving property and to make sure that we diminish the kind of threat that does exist out there. Recovery efforts, coupled with compensation for private property, that is a big part of what this effort is about. I congratulate, again, the gentleman from California (Mr. Pombo); and I know the gentleman from California (Mr. Cardoza) has been working very hard on this, obviously, because he has had a lot of impact, as he just outlined. Mr. Speaker, I think that we can come with, I hope, a very, very strong vote from both Democrats and Republicans for both the rule and the underlying legislation. I thank again my friend for his efforts on this.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, on the 2nd of June our very distinguished colleague, Chris Cox, was nominated by President Bush to become the chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission. On July 29, the Senate voted unanimously to confirm Chris as the 28th chairman of the SEC. His nomination was widely heralded. That economic guru, Larry Kudlow, said, ``Chris Cox's keen intellect and free market view point will provide a breath of fresh air at the Securities and Exchange Commission.'' The majority leader in the Senate said, ``Chris Cox will bring an experienced and steady hand to the Securities and Exchange Commission.'' Stanford law professor, who is a former SEC commissioner, Joseph Grundfest, said, ``We should give a great deal of respect and deference to Chris Cox's tremendous intellectual abilities and political skills.'' Mr. Speaker, I mention this praise because it so clearly shows that the gain at the Securities and Exchange Commission is a significant loss for us here in the House of Representatives. As his colleagues in Congress, we will all miss working with Chris. Chairman Cox was first elected to the House in 1988 to represent Orange County, California. During his nine terms in office, he gained a well-deserved reputation as a hardworking, action-oriented, fair and bipartisan Member. In fact, he said one time, ``The well-worn partisan rut is not a place where you are going to get a lot of work done.'' Chairman Cox did not spend a lot of time in that rut. He was an integral part of our California delegation, served on important committees and delved into critical issues facing our Nation. He served on the Committee on Energy and Commerce, the Committee on Financial Services, the Committee on Government Reform and the Committee on the Budget. He served as a member of the majority leadership for over 10 years as Chairman of the House Policy Committee. Most recently, we all know Chris served as chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security when we established this new committee. Throughout his involvement in national security issues, he was very intimately involved in those throughout his entire 17 years in Congress. He was a tireless advocate for our men and women in uniform, a vocal anti- Communist, an active proponent of California's military bases, and an ardent supporter of the global war on terror. As Chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security, Mr. Speaker, Chris pushed for common-sense reform to ensure that we spent homeland security dollars based on actual risk, and he left a legacy of very vigorous oversight at the Department of Homeland Security. Additionally, as a representative from California, Chairman Cox was intimately involved in the effort to secure our border and give the border patrol the tools needed to apprehend anyone seeking to enter our country illegally, particularly those wishing to do our Nation harm. It is fitting that he is now the country's top cop for the securities markets because he has long been committed to improving and supporting the free market. Whether it was ending the double taxation on shareholder dividends or supporting innovative technologies with the Internet Tax Freedom Act or standing up for free trade by voting for permanent normal trade relations for the People's Republic of China or protecting investors from junk lawsuits with the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act, Chairman Cox has been in the forefront of making sure capitalism and financial markets work on their own when they can but, most important, work within the law around the clock. When accepting the nomination to chair the SEC, Chairman Cox had this to say about the U.S. economy: ``The natural enemies of this economic marvel are fraud and unfair dealing.'' At the SEC, he will continue, Mr. Speaker, to do what he practiced here in the Congress, instilling faith in the financial markets by targeting bad actors and protecting investors. Throughout his life, Chairman Cox has held firm to his conservative beliefs; his faith in democracy; and his pro-growth, free market principles, even when his views were not always popular. When he was at Harvard in the early 1970s, where he earned a business and law degree, he placed a Ronald Reagan bumper sticker on his car, only to have his car repeatedly vandalized. There was little that could intimidate Chairman Cox, and that was particularly due to the confidence he derived from his political lodestar, the man whose name was on that bumper sticker, Ronald Reagan. Chris and I both share an intense admiration for Ronald Reagan. President Reagan taught our country to stand tall, to believe in and trust the virtues of democracy, the power of the individual, the promise of entrepreneurship, and the might of our military. Chris had the distinct privilege of serving President Reagan as a White House counsel. He worked behind the scenes to promote Ronald Reagan's muscular foreign policy and effective, limited government domestic policy. In 1988, during Chris's first campaign for Congress, President Reagan said, ``I could always count on Chris Cox to push our agenda forward and to keep his sights on why we were in Washington.'' Mr. Speaker, those words still ring true today. Chairman Cox is a man of powerful intellect, whose selfless service of his constituents and of his country has earned the respect of everyone he has worked with, and he has never lost sight of why he was here. I know he will continue to serve the people of the United States with unfailing dedication and the utmost integrity. That is how his colleagues in Congress knew him, and that is how his new colleagues at the SEC will come to know him. President Bush gave Chairman Cox this mission to the SEC: ``To continue to strengthen public trust in our markets so the American economy can continue to grow and create jobs.'' Mr. Speaker, if the success of his congressional career is any guide, there is no doubt that Chairman Cox will accomplish this mission. I offer my sincere thanks to Chris for the pleasure of working with him as a member of the California delegation, as a dedicated disciple of President Reagan and as a force for progress here in the House of Representatives. I wish him the very best as he embarks on this new path.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time of the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess).

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend for yielding. I rise in very strong support of this amendment. I am proud to join with the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis) and the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) in co-sponsoring it. The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) and I had an amendment that increased by $50 million in the appropriations bill, having worked closely with the Committee on Appropriations, for the reimbursement to the States for the incarceration of illegal immigrant felons. Obviously, this is a very pressing challenge. The sheriff of Los Angeles County has told me that it costs $150 million a year simply for the incarceration of criminals who are in this country illegally, and in light of that fact, is making sure that we realize that the States, the States have been shouldering this burden. Policing our borders is a Federal responsibility. It is not the responsibility of cities, counties, or States. And that is why I believe that ensuring that States that have already paid, already paid for this tremendous cost, should be reimbursed. There are those who believe that this is somehow money that is moving ahead and it is fungible so they can spend it on something else. These are dollars that have already been expended. So that is why this amendment is very important, to make sure that as we proceed with this very difficult challenge of border security and immigration reform that we pass this. I thank my friends on both sides of the aisle for the strong support in this effort.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on the subject of my Special Order.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, on April 29, 2002, Los Angeles County Sheriff's Deputy David March was brutally slain execution-style during a routine traffic stop. Suspect Armando Garcia fled to Mexico within hours of Deputy March's death and has eluded prosecution by U.S. authorities. Tragically, Mexico's refusal to extradite individuals who may face the death penalty or life imprisonment has complicated efforts to bring Armando Garcia back to the U.S. to face prosecution for his crimes. Over the last 3 years, I have fought to see Armando Garcia and other fugitives accused in killings brought back to the U.S. I have met with officials from the Department of Justice and the State Department. I have written repeatedly, joined by other members of Congress, to President Bush and to Secretaries of State Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice, calling for aggressive action to change Mexico's extradition policy. I have even met with high officials of the Mexican government in an effort to impress upon our neighbor the intolerable nature of its extradition policy. However, 3 years later, Armando Garcia and thousands of other fugitives still roam free. I will continue to work with the administration to bring Deputy March's murderer to justice. I will also continue our fight to persuade Mexico to change its policy. But until that is achieved, I believe that the Congress has a duty to act as well. It was at the urging of Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca that my friend from Pasadena, Mr. Schiff, and I introduced H.R. 2363, the Peace Officer Justice Act, to make it a Federal crime to kill a peace officer and flee the country to avoid prosecution. This bill ensures that criminals who murder law enforcement officials and escape to another country will have the full weight of the Federal Government on their trail. Currently under Federal law, it is a crime to kill a Federal peace officer or state/local officers if they are engaged in a Federal investigation. We believe there is no reason that a heinous crime, such as the one in Deputy March's case, should not also be a Federal crime with the same penalties as the murder of a Federal officer. The punishment for fleeing prosecution under existing law is no more than 5 years or merely a fine. I believe that a fine or 5 years imprisonment for the cold-blooded murder of a law enforcement officer is tantamount to no justice at all. The Peace Officer Justice Act makes such an act punishable by the Federal murder statute, which includes the death penalty or life in prison. This legislation is supported by the Fraternal Order of Police and the National Sheriffs Association. However, Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley has decided to strongly oppose the bill citing several concerns with its provisions. Specifically, Mr. Cooley believes that making such a crime a violation of Federal law would provide ``exclusive jurisdiction'' for the Federal Government to pursue a cop-killer who flees the country. In response, I made clear that this bill provides concurrent jurisdiction for the Federal Government to prosecute; not the authority to supersede jurisdiction of states or localities. Therefore, either the Federal Government or the State/local prosecutor could pursue the case. In fact, if the State has already pursued its own prosecution of such a crime, that would not prohibit the Federal Government from pursuing a subsequent prosecution under this bill. For example, in United States v. Lanza, 260 U.S. 377, 382 (1922), the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the conviction in Federal court of a person previously convicted in State court for performing the same act. The Court stated ``We have here two sovereigns deriving power from different sources, capable of dealing with the same subject-matter within the same territory. Each government in determining what shall be an offense against its peace and dignity is exercising its own sovereignty, not that of the other.'' This ``dual sovereignty doctrine'' has also been used to uphold successive prosecutions by two States for the same conduct. See e.g. Heath v. Alabama, 474 U.S. 82 (1985) (permitting a defendant who crossed a State line in the course of a kidnap/murder to be prosecuted for murder in both States). However, Mr. Cooley strongly disagrees with U.S. Supreme Court precedent. Mr. Cooley also cites California Penal Code 793, which prohibits the prosecution of any crime that has already been tried in the U.S. or other State. He argues that California would not be able to prosecute cop-killers who flee the country due to the State law and the Federal Government's ``exclusive jurisdiction'' of such cases. Mr. Cooley also argues that if Federal prosecutors, using their ``exclusive jurisdiction'' of such crimes, decide to forego the death penalty or life imprisonment to extradite a suspect back from Mexico to the U.S., that any term of years set by the Federal Government would be less than any term that California prosecutors would seek for punishment. Specifically, he cites that under California law, second degree murder of a law enforcement officer, without special circumstances, is punishable by minimum of 25 years to life with the possibility of parole, while second degree murder under the Federal murder statute is ``any term of years or life.'' In addition, Mr. Cooley cites that local prosecutors are more experienced at prosecuting murder cases and are better at the job than Federal prosecutors. Finally, Mr. Cooley cites the ``Rule of Speciality'' in the U.S.- Mexico Extradition Treaty, which states that individuals extradited from one country to another can only be prosecuted under the charges included in the extradition request. Therefore, he argues that since H.R. 2363 provides ``exclusive jurisdiction'' to the Federal Government in such cases, that California will be barred from prosecuting a cop- killer who flees the country. Although I strongly disagree with Mr. Cooley's interpretation of ``exclusive jurisdiction,'' I have reached out to him and local law enforcement officers for suggestions on how to improve the bill. Based on their feedback, I, along with Mr. Schiff, am introducing the Justice for Peace Officers Act to build on the provisions of H.R. 2363 by enhancing the punishment for cop-killers and those who aid them, providing priority to State/local prosecutors in such cases, making clear that the bill does not supersede State/local jurisdiction and urging the renegotiation of the U.S.Mexico Extradition Treaty to resolve the death penalty/life imprisonment roadblock. The Justice for Peace Officers Act, like the Peace Officer Justice Act, makes it a Federal crime to kill a peace officer and flee the country. And like H.R. 2363, the Justice for Peace Officers Act makes the crime for first degree murder punishable by the death penalty or life imprisonment. The Justice for Peace Officers Act goes a step further by making murder in the second degree punishable by a mandatory minimum of 30 years in prison or life imprisonment. Under the current ``federal murder statute'' (18 U.S.C. 1111), the punishment for second degree murder is any term of years or life imprisonment. This change ensures that persons guilty of killing a peace officer under second degree murder and fleeing the country will face a significant minimum number of years under lock and key. The Justice for Peace Officers Act also raises the penalty for those who help cowardly cop-killers flee the country to avoid prosecution. Under the current ``accessory after the fact'' federal statute (18 U.S.C. 3), the punishment for helping suspects, facing the death penalty or life imprisonment, to avoid capture is a maximum of 15 years in prison. The Justice for Peace Officers Act ensures that such aiders and abettors would serve a mandatory minimum sentence of 15 years behind bars. Let me be clear that it will always be my preference for State and local prosecutors to go after cop killers--police keep our local communities safe and local prosecutors should have primary jurisdiction over these cases. That is why I included language in the Justice for Peace Officers Act to give priority to State/local prosecutors to pursue a suspect of killing a peace officer and fleeing the country. Specifically, the Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General, the Associate Attorney General, or an Assistant Attorney General, in consultation with the appropriate State/local prosecutors, must provide formal approval in writing to pursue such a case. This gives State/ local and Federal officials the opportunity to confer on the best course of action, and gives preference to State/local officials since no action can be taken on the Federal level without the additional step of obtaining formal written permission. This language is based on a provision in the current ``flight to avoid prosecution'' Federal statute (18 U.S.C. 1073). Also, the Justice for Peace Officers Act includes language making clear that nothing in the bill would supersede the authority of State/local prosecutors. In addition, the penalty under the Justice for Peace Officers Act would be a consecutive sentence to any other State or Federal punishment. Since State/local authorities have first priority to prosecute and sentence such a suspect, the provision would ensure that any punishment on the local/State level would be enhanced by an additional Federal sentence. Finally, we firmly believe that the Bush Administration should use all tools available to bring about a change in Mexico's policy regarding the extradition of nationals that will allow these brutal killers to face justice in the U.S. That is why we included a provision in the Justice for Peace Officers Act directing the Secretary of State to enter into formal discussions with the Mexican government on the U.S.-Mexico Extradition Treaty. The provision also directs the Secretary of State to urge the Mexican Government to use all available actions to persuade the Mexican Supreme Court to reconsider its October 2001 ruling so that the possibility of life imprisonment will not have an effect on the timely extradition of criminal suspects from Mexico to the U.S. Mr. Speaker, I hope that the Justice for Peace Officers Act will signal to Mexico and any other country that refuses to extradite a fugitive cop-killer that the Congress of the United States considers this a crime against America and will bring the full resources of the Federal Government to bear to seek justice. I urge all of my colleagues to co-sponsor the Justice for Peace Officers Act.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, on April 29 of 2002, Los Angeles County Sheriff's Deputy David March was brutally slain execution-style during a routine traffic stop. Suspect Armando Garcia, an illegal immigrant, fled to Mexico within hours of Deputy March's murder and has avoided prosecution by U.S. authorities for over 3 years. Mexico's refusal to extradite individuals who may face the death penalty or life imprisonment has hindered efforts to bring Armando Garcia back to the United States to face prosecution for his crime. The same border that Garcia illegally crossed to enter our country now serves as a wall of protection for him. This is an outrage. It is an unspeakable injustice to the loved ones of David March, and to all of the men and women who risk their lives each day so that we can live in safety. When our peace officers patrol their beats, keep an eye on our neighborhoods and police the streets, they are walking the line, selflessly enforcing our laws and keeping our communities safe. When the very laws they have a duty to uphold are abused by fleeing murderers, justice is denied, the security of peace officers is placed in jeopardy, and the rule of law on which our great Nation is based is weakened. Over the last 3 years, I have joined many of my colleagues in efforts to see that Armando Garcia and other fugitives accused in killings on our soil are returned to the United States to face justice. We have met with officials from the Department of Justice and the Department of State. We have urged President Bush to call for aggressive action to change Mexico's extradition policy. I have met with President Fox and other high officials of the Mexican government, including their Supreme Court, in an effort to impress upon our neighbor that its extradition policy is intolerable. However, 3 years later, Armando Garcia and thousands of other fugitives still are beyond the grasp of our legal system. Recently, in a potentially critical turning point, the Mexican Supreme Court issued a decision that allowed consecutive prison terms for certain murders. This could have the effect of recognizing that life imprisonment does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment, a position previously held by the Mexican Supreme Court, as I said. Amid sensitive talks and signs of progress, I remain committed to working with the administration to bring Deputy March's murderer to justice. But until that is achieved, Congress has a duty to take action to ensure that what happened to Deputy March never happens again. It was at the urging of Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca that my friend from Pasadena (Mr. Schiff) and I introduced H.R. 2363, the Peace Officer Justice Act, to make it a Federal crime to kill a peace officer and flee the country to avoid prosecution. This bill ensures that criminals who murder law enforcement officials and escape to another country will have the full weight of the Federal Government on their trail. This legislation is supported by the Fraternal Order of Police, the National Sheriffs Association and Roy Burns, president of the Association of Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs. After we introduced the bill, Mr. Speaker, Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley voiced concerns to me with several of its provisions. Specifically, he believed that making such a crime a violation of Federal law would provide exclusive jurisdiction for the Federal Government to pursue a cop-killer who flees the country. I have reached out to Mr. Cooley on numerous occasions for suggestions on how to improve the bill. Having addressed every single issue that the District Attorney raised, I, along with the gentleman from Pasadena, am reintroducing this legislation. It is now going to be called the Justice for Peace Officers Act. Thanks to the input from Mr. Cooley, this is a stronger, better and more aggressive bill. This bill makes it a Federal crime to kill a peace officer and flee the country. And it makes the crime for first degree murder punishable by the death penalty or life imprisonment. The bill also goes a step further by making murder in the second degree punishable by a mandatory minimum of 30 years in prison or life imprisonment. This legislation raises the penalty for those who help cop-killers flee the country from a maximum of 15 years in prison to a mandatory minimum sentence of 15 years behind bars. Mr. Speaker, it will always be our preference for State and local prosecutors to go after cop-killers. Police keep our local communities safe and local prosecutors should have primary jurisdiction over these cases. That is why we included language to give priority to local prosecutors, and we have made clear that nothing in this bill would supersede that authority. In addition, the penalty under the bill would be a consecutive sentence to any other State or Federal punishment. This provision would ensure that any punishment on the local level would be enhanced by an additional Federal sentence. Finally, we firmly believe that the Bush administration should use all tools available to bring about a change in Mexico's extradition policy. We included a provision directing the Secretary of State to enter into formal discussions with the Mexican government on the U.S.- Mexico extradition treaty. Mr. Speaker, this legislation sends a powerful message to Mexico and any other country that refuses to extradite a fugitive cop-killer. It shows that the United States Congress considers this a crime against America. Passage of this bill will ensure that perpetrators of these heinous crimes will be brought to justice. I urge my colleagues to join with us in cosponsoring this very important measure.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, over the past few minutes, beginning with the great prayer from our Chaplain, we have been talking about the devastation of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. And we know that immediately following Hurricane Katrina, Speaker Hastert called along with Senator Frist for the establishment of select committees that would deal with an analysis of what the problems were leading up to Hurricane Katrina and what took place in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Unfortunately, the Democratic leadership chose to not appoint any Members to this select committee. I have just been watching over the last while the hearings that have been taking place. Before they took place, the Democratic leader said that these hearings would be nothing but a whitewash. Well, having seen the questions raised by my Republican colleagues on the committee, they are tough, strong, hard questions that are being raised of the former FEMA administrator, Mr. Brown. I believe, Mr. Speaker, that it is responsible to appoint the full complement of membership. It is imperative that the people who have been victimized by these tragedies are heard through their representatives on this select committee, and for those of us in the rest of the country who face the prospect of a disaster, in my State, earthquakes, fires, mudslides create the threat of really causing a tremendous loss of life, we need to figure out what the problems are at FEMA. So, Mr. Speaker, let us see the leader appoint the full complement of membership to that committee so that their very important questions can be raised.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, the Committee on Rules may meet next week to grant a rule which could limit the amendment process for floor consideration of H.R. 3824, the Threatened and Endangered Species Act of 2005. The Committee on Resources is marking up H.R. 3824 today and is expected to file its report with the House early next week. Any Member wishing to offer an amendment should submit 55 copies of the amendment and one copy of a brief explanation of the amendment to the Committee on Rules in room H-312 of the Capitol by 10 a.m. on Wednesday, September 28. Members should draft their amendments to the text of the bill as ordered reported by the Committee on Resources, which should be available on the Web sites of the Committee on Resources and the Committee on Rules by 2 p.m. on Monday, September 26. Members should use the Office of Legislative Counsel to ensure that their amendments are drafted in the most appropriate format. Members are also advised to check with the Office of the Parliamentarian to be certain their amendments comply with the rules of the House.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, the Committee on Rules may meet next week to grant a rule which could limit the amendment process for floor consideration of H.R. 3402, the Department of Justice Appropriations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 2006 through 2009. Any Member wishing to offer an amendment should submit 55 copies of the amendment and one copy of a brief explanation of the amendment to the Committee on Rules in room H-312 of the Capitol by noon on Tuesday, September 27, 2005. Members should draft their amendments to the bill as reported by the Committee on the Judiciary on July 27, 2005, which is expected to be filed with the House on Thursday, September 22. Members are also advised that the text should be available for their review on the Web sites of the Committee on the Judiciary and the Committee on Rules today. Members should use the Office of Legislative Counsel to ensure that their amendments are drafted in the most appropriate format, and should check with the Office of the Parliamentarian to be certain that their amendments comply with the rules of the House.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. 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. 2123.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that in the engrossment of the bill (H.R. 2123), the Clerk be authorized to correct section numbers, punctuation, citations, and cross-references and to make such other technical and conforming changes as may be necessary or appropriate to reflect the actions of the House in amending the bill.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of House Resolution 441, which congratulates the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Space Shuttle Discovery's crew for their recent 14-day test flight. The mission was an important step in returning the Shuttle to flight and toward meeting our obligations in completing the International Space Station. The many NASA employees and contractors who worked to make the flight safe and successful deserve our support and praise. The Shuttle's successful flight lays the foundation for an exciting decade for NASA and an exciting time for everyone interested in space science and exploration. I am especially looking forward to several missions that NASA will undertake through the La Canada Flintridge- based Jet Propulsion Laboratory. As my colleagues well know, I have the privilege of representing JPL and I am a strong supporter of it here in Congress. JPL' s missions have consistently generated public support and are a mainstay in NASA's scientific portfolio. JPL's continued management of NASA's Mars program, which for the last year and a half has brought us the twin Rovers Spirit and Opportunity, has resulted in unprecedented success. In addition, the planned 2007 launch of the Phoenix Mars Scout and the 2009 launch of the Mars Science Laboratory will provide the country with a long-duration science laboratory that represents a major leap in space exploration. Specifically, MSL will collect soil samples and rock cores from Mars and analyze them for organic compounds and environmental conditions that could have supported microbial life in the past. Through its work at JPL, NASA is also slated to begin two major missions that will give us greater insight into the origins of our universe. The first of these is the Space Interferometry Mission, or SIM PlanetQuest. Scheduled for launch in 2012, SIM will determine the positions and distances of stars several hundred times more accurately than any previous program. This precision will allow us to measure the distances to stars throughout the galaxy and to probe nearby stars for Earth-sized planets. The second mission, the Europa Orbiter, will discover whether an ocean exists beneath the surface of one of Jupiter's most interesting moons. This mission should launch in 2015. JPL is also poised to conduct a series of missions that will examine Earth and lead to better predictions and understandings of our planet's climate. These missions include the launch of CloudSat later this year; the Ocean Surface Topography Mission and the Orbiting Carbon Observatory in 2008; and the 2009 launch of Aquarius, which will provide the first-ever global maps of salt concentrations on the ocean's surface. These missions will provide valuable insight into our planet's precipitation and weather patterns. Each of JPL's current and future missions are an integral part of NASA's overall space exploration plan. With JPL's missions and other NASA initiatives, such as the agency's rollout of its new exploration architecture for returning to the Moon, there can be no doubt the next decade will be an exciting one. In closing, Mr. Speaker, I want to again say that the most recent Shuttle mission is just another example of what NASA is doing right. I am pleased to join my colleagues today in congratulating the crew and look forward to another successful Shuttle mission in the near future.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor one of the great promoters of tolerance in our time, Simon Wiesenthal, who we learned has passed away at the age of 96. Mr. Wiesenthal, who spent 4 years in Nazi concentration camps, dedicated his life to seeking justice for those who were unable to seek it for themselves. While Mr. Wiesenthal survived the Holocaust and was rescued by American troops in 1945, dozens of his family members, including his own mother, perished at the hands of the Nazis. Upon his liberation, Mr. Wiesenthal relentlessly and often singlehandedly tracked down over 1,100 Nazi war criminals and saw that they were brought to justice. Without his tenacity, such mass murderers as Adolf Eichmann and Franz Stangl may never have been held accountable for their crimes against humanity. But Mr. Wiesenthal's legacy is not limited to atoning for the past. He also knew the importance of educating future generations to ensure that similar atrocities would never again take place. He established the Simon Wiesenthal Center to foster tolerance and understanding. The Center, headquartered in Los Angeles but with offices throughout the entire world, has made great contributions to efforts to combat racism, anti-Semitism, terrorism and genocide. I have had the great privilege, as has Governor Schwarzenegger and both President Bushes, of visiting and working with the Wiesenthal Center over the years to advance their noble mission. Additionally, the Wiesenthal Center's Museum of Tolerance hosts 350,000 visitors annually, including 110,000 children, vividly educating them on the history of the Holocaust and the importance of defeating bigotry and racism in our time. For as Mr. Wiesenthal himself once said, ``The history of man is the history of crimes, and history can repeat. So information is a defense. Through this, we can build, we must build, a defense against repetition.'' Mr. Speaker, Simon Wiesenthal represented the best of humanity. Born into unspeakable tragedy, he refused to ignore his responsibility to those who, unlike him, did not outlive the Holocaust. His dogged determination was the strongest voice of the victims. Accountability and education, not revenge, were his aims. Mr. Wiesenthal's greatest lesson, Mr. Speaker, was that even out of such horror, some good can come. His message of tolerance is one that must continue to be honored, respected and taught. If someone who suffered so greatly can turn his life into a positive force for change, surely the rest of us can take his lesson to heart and never forget the dark past in the hope of building a brighter future.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, coming together is what this is all about. This is a bipartisan committee that has been proposed by the Speaker, and we look forward to seeing those minority Members who are going to be part of this process. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Miami, Florida (Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart), the very distinguished chairman of our Subcommittee on Budget and Process Reform.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.