Phil Gingrey

Mr. GINGREY

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentlemen from California (Mr. Gary G. Miller).

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the question if the gentleman is opposed to the basic principles of this bill, the preponderance of provisions that are included in this base bill, or does he have other concerns that he might want to express?

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

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\3/4\ minutes to the gentlemen from Arizona, Mr. Hayworth. (Mr. HAYWORTH asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute to respond to the gentlewoman from California. I want to remind the gentlewoman we are not criminalizing 11 million illegal immigrants in this country. Indeed, 60 percent are already criminalized from the standpoint from entering this country illegally, and 40 percent are just because they have overstayed their visas, and we are equalizing that in this bill. The other thing that is important for the gentlewoman to know, given the history of her ancestors, that addressing this issue first and foremost, border security, is protecting, indeed protecting those 11 million, most of whom are working and supporting their families and are law-abiding except for the fact that they came in illegally. We want to protect them as well. With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to my colleague on the Rules Committee, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Putnam).

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Florida has a great heart, and he indeed is my friend, and he knows that. He in his remarks indeed tugs at our heartstrings as he so eloquently quotes poetry and talks about the inscription on Lady Liberty and the men and women over the history of our country who have come to our shores seeking new opportunities. It compels me to think about and to speak about my own heritage, my maternal grandparents, my grandfather an immigrant, an Ellis Island immigrant, in the early part of the 20th century from County Roscommon in the country of Ireland; my grandmother, Ellen Heron from Scotland. These two young people met in New York City and married and started a family of five children, including one of whom is my precious mother, 88 years old today. I never knew my grandfather because he died at 25 years of age, literally working himself to death, possibly on buildings like the Twin Towers that were attacked so viciously 4 years ago where over 3,000 people were killed, and not just United States citizens. There were many foreign nationals among those 3,100. So I certainly share the compassion and the intense feeling that my good friend from Florida has with regard to our love in this country of immigrants, and we do welcome them. I am sure if my grandparents were living today, they would want to thank God that they had this opportunity to come into our great country to produce a better life for them and their children. In those days, of course, they had to be physically healthy and mentally healthy. But today, Mr. Speaker, as we all know, the times unfortunately have changed drastically, and what we are trying to do with regard to border security is not just to protect our own citizens, but protect every person who comes to this country legally seeking a better opportunity, the land of free, that they are safe to go to work, to go to school and raise their children. Mr. Speaker, that is what this legislation is all about. I want to make sure that my colleagues on both sides of the aisle understand. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 621 is a structured rule providing for further consideration of the bill. It provides that no further general debate is in order, and the remaining proceedings under House Resolution 610 shall be considered as subsumed by this resolution. It makes in order only those amendments printed in the Rules Committee report accompanying this resolution. This resolution provides that the amendments printed in the report accompanying the resolution may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole. It waives all points of orders against the amendments printed in the report and provides one motion to recommit with or without instructions. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 621 and the underlying bill, H.R. 4437, the Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005. Yesterday, this House began consideration of the underlying bill and a portion of the amendments offered that were made in order. Following yesterday's debate, the Rules Committee completed its consideration of over 130 amendments, and today, upon passage of this rule, we will be able to complete consideration of the bill and the amendments that were made in order. Mr. Speaker, I again would like to commend Chairmen Sensenbrenner and King for working together to give this House an opportunity to debate the issue of border security and to pass meaningful legislation to secure our borders. As I emphasized yesterday, this debate is, at its core, an issue of protecting the homeland. While the economic and the social impact of illegal immigration cannot be denied, the integrity of our borders is fundamentally a matter of national security. Mr. Speaker, we do not have the luxury to turn a blind eye to our borders and simply do nothing, and this problem cannot be talked away. I believe that today's bill, though not perfect, puts many good ideas into action. Border security did not become a problem overnight and, Mr. Speaker, it simply cannot be solved in 1 day. Now, I understand that some of my colleagues may have legitimate disagreements with certain aspects of the bill. In fact, I do not agree with every aspect of this bill and would even like to see some additions. However, I remain confident, I remain confident that the underlying legislation will prove essential in beginning to turn the tide on illegal immigration. H.R. 4437 is a commonsense bill that makes the employment verification system mandatory rather than the existing voluntary program. It also increases penalties for illegally crossing our border and for businesses that knowingly hire these illegal immigrants. We must mandate detention for all aliens apprehended at the border, especially the so-called OTM, ``other than Mexican,'' category, and deport them back into their country of origin. Mr. Speaker, if we pass H.R. 4437, we will have stronger borders and we will save and protect lives. And, Mr. Speaker, not just the lives of our own legal inhabitants, but also the lives and the safety of so many of the unsuspecting immigrants left stranded on our side of the border. So, Mr. Speaker, I want to ask my colleagues for their support of the rule and the underlying bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 621 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds. The gentleman from California did not ask me to respond, but he suggested the bill is one of two things, but I suggest to him that, rather, it is a third thing. This bill, indeed, is a response to the American people who are demanding we secure our borders first. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GINGREY

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), the distinguished chairman of the Rules Committee. (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time for the purpose of closing.

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 610 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 610 is a structured rule. It provides 2 hours of general debate, equally divided among and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary and the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Homeland Security. It waives all points of order against consideration of the bill. It provides that the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on the Judiciary and now printed in the bill, modified by the amendment printed in part A of the Rules Committee report accompanying the resolution, shall be considered as adopted in the House and in the Committee of the Whole and shall be considered as read. It waives all points of order against the bill, as amended. This resolution makes in order only those amendments printed in part B of the Rules Committee report. It provides that the amendments printed in part B of the report may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole. It waives all points of order against amendments printed in part B of the report, and it provides that after disposition of the amendments printed in part B of the report, the Committee of the Whole shall rise without motion, and no further consideration of the bill shall be in order except by a subsequent order of the House. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 610 and the underlying H.R. 4437, the Border Protection, Antiterterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005. Today, this Congress continues an ongoing and difficult debate. The need for fundamental immigration reform is critical and long overdue. In 1986, President Reagan pushed for reforms to address this problem. In 1996, the 104th Congress pushed for more reforms to address the problem. Now here we are 10 years later. This Congress once again has an opportunity to debate how to best secure our borders and remove incentives for illegal immigration by enacting meaningful changes. I want to thank Chairman Sensenbrenner and Chairman King for this bill to close our borders to illegal immigrants and potential terrorists. Mr. Speaker, since the attacks of September 11, 4 years ago, the debate on immigration is a fundamentally different debate. Border security is no longer just a legal or economic issue, which of course it still is. Secure borders now are also a matter of national security. Procrastination and ignoring the problem will simply not make it go away. Every day we put off debating and passing comprehensive reform creates more and more opportunities for illegal immigrants to break our laws and violate our borders with the social, economic and political repercussions. For instance, there are an estimated 376,000 illegal immigrants who live in my home State of Georgia and bear an incredible toll on our social services and health care system. The burden of illegal immigrants continues to increase for the American citizens as hospitals and schools are filled with illegal immigrants who cannot pay for their education and medical expenses. Mr. Speaker, some of our schools continue to struggle simply because of the inherent burden of some illegal immigrants who require extensive remedial education at the expense of the American taxpayer and our schoolchildren. Regardless of their intention, this effect on our schools highlights the fact that illegal immigration is not a victimless crime. As this Congress continues to contemplate ways to relieve escalating medical costs, part of that expense is to reimburse doctors, nurses and hospitals who have treated illegal immigrants who could not pay their medical bills. I am a firsthand witness to doctors who have treated patients, only to have them skip out on a medical bill because they are here illegally and they do not want to be traced. Mr. Speaker, illegal immigration also endangers the lives of the immigrants themselves. I do not think this can be stated too forcefully; illegal immigration also endangers the lives of the immigrants themselves. Just ask the families of the 19 illegal immigrants who were found dead in the back of a tractor-trailer truck in Victoria, Texas, in May of 2003. As long as incentives for human border smuggling persist, we will continue to see people manipulated, abused and, yes, even killed through this deplorable process. As I mentioned earlier and as is clearly evidenced and described, illegal immigration is not a victimless crime, and H.R. 4437 goes a long way to combating it on multiple fronts, from the provision against illegal immigrants themselves to those who would either incentivize or aid them in illegally entering this country. First, Mr. Speaker, this bill will make illegal immigration into this country a felony offense, thereby increasing the penalties for jumping the border. H.R. 4437 will combat the economic incentives for illegal immigration by transferring the current employment verification system that validates Social Security numbers from a voluntary program to a mandatory program. This bill also would increase civil and criminal penalties for those employers who knowingly and repeatedly employ or hire an illegal worker. Further, this bill would mandate detention for all aliens apprehended at the border while also stiffening the penalties for aliens already removed once from this country who try to reenter. Additionally, H.R. 4437 would increase existing and establish further mandatory minimums for alien smuggling and would vigorously combat through deportation members of alien street gangs. From the border to the street of every city, this bill takes a holistic approach to reforming our immigration laws, strengthening our border in defense of our country against a very real threat to not only American security but also, Mr. Speaker, American sovereignty. I ask for my colleagues' full support of the rule and this underlying bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. King), the chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security. (Mr. KING of New York asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I will draw this first debate to a close by again congratulating the Committee on the Judiciary, Chairman Sensenbrenner, as well as the Committee on Homeland Security and Chairman King for bringing this comprehensive bill before the House today. As I stated in my opening remarks, the problem of illegal immigration poses multiple threats and must be addressed in multiple ways, and I am pleased that this bill before us today goes a long way and is a great first step to attacking the problem, both from the supply-and-demand sides of the equation, as well as from the security side. Mr. Speaker, through both strengthening our borders and diminishing economic incentives for illegal immigration, we stand a much better chance of truly reducing this problem in a meaningful way. And, yes, we do intend, in an expeditious manner, to address the issue of a solution for the existing 11 million illegals, most of whom are working hard to support their families. Again, I want to encourage all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this rule so we can move forward with the initial consideration of the underlying bill. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution. The previous question was ordered.

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Florida is well aware that we will be having another rule and additional amendments made in order under that rule. Many of the ones that he mentioned hopefully will have that opportunity to be made in order and to be discussed. I want to point out also that the give and take between the Democrats and the Republicans on the Rules Committee brought to the attention this potential problem of criminalizing existing illegal aliens, and we will have a manager's amendment in the next rule that corrects that. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Keller), a member of the Judiciary Committee.

Mr. GINGREY

Mr. GINGREY. Madam Speaker, I feel honored this evening as we approach the midnight hour here in Washington to realize that it is the dawn of a new day in Iraq. The sun is coming up almost as we speak, and I raise my hand and my index finger in symbolic fashion to salute the 10.5 million people who went to the polls in that historic election on December 15. Madam Speaker, listen to what some of the Iraqi people have had to say about how they feel about the vote that was cast yesterday. ``This day is revenge for Saddam.'' Kurdish voter Chiman Saleh, whose two brothers were killed by Saddam's forces. The ink-stained finger after he voted. ``The time has come to build Iraq with our own hands and to use the great wealth that God has granted to Iraq, to rebuild Iraq so that we can turn our poverty into wealth and our misery into happiness.'' Prime minister al-Jaafari. Finally, from the Associated Press, some good news: ``So many Sunni Arabs voted that ballots ran out in some places. The strong participation by Sunnis,'' the backbone of the insurgency, Madam Speaker, ``bolstered United States hopes that the election could produce a broad-based government capable of ending the daily suicide attacks and other violence.'' From the Associated Press. Good news indeed. Madam Speaker, listen to what General George Casey, the Multinational Force Commanding General in Iraq, said today: ``The Iraqi people have had a great day. It is their third national poll this year: January 30th elections for the Transitional National Assembly, 8.5 million people voted; October 15th national referendum on the constitution, 10 million people voted on. December 15th elections for a permanent assembly, 10.5 to 11 million people voted, and many, many Sunnis. Voter turnout was high. We expect it to be at or above the October level. Turnout in the Anbar Province in western Iraq, the most violent part, the Sunni stronghold, is suspected to have increased fairly substantially over October. There was low violence across Iraq. We expect it to be at or below the October level. The Iraqi Security Forces performed wonderfully to maintain security at the polling sites. The high sentiment was set this morning when Iraqis swiftly repaired damage from an improvised explosive device at a polling place and that polling site was still open at 7 o'clock in the morning.'' Listen to this, Madam Speaker, from General Casey. ``Three years ago, Saddam Hussein was still tyrannizing the Iraqi people. The accomplishments of the Iraqis and the Coalition since then have been unprecedented, even in the face of a ruthless and a resilient insurgency. They include the transition to sovereignty, elections for a transitional government, a peaceful transition from the interim to the transitional government, the drafting and approving of the constitution, the building of Iraqi Security Forces to more than 200,000, and today, the elections for a permanent assembly.'' Madam Speaker, as we close out, I just want to say that this is also a great day for those 2,175 soldiers, men and women, who have given their lives, 15,000 others who have been severely injured, and 30,000 or more innocent Iraqi people, many of them women and children, who have given their lives for this cause. This is a great day. This gives some peace and comfort, I am sure, to the Brown family of Atlanta, who gave their son Tyler, a First Lieutenant, in this battle, as he was killed in action; and the Johnson family of Armuchee, Georgia, in my district, when Joe and Janet gave their precious son Justin. At least some comfort will come to these families at this time of Christmas when everybody else is celebrating and they have a certain sadness in their heart that will never go away. They will know that their sons did not die in vain, that this is the success that they were fitting and dying for. God bless them, God bless the Commander-in- Chief, and God bless America.

Mr. GINGREY. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to speak out of order.

Mr. GINGREY

Mr. GINGREY. I yield to the gentleman from New York.

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate that spirit of cooperation. I know there are some concerns about the amendment. Indeed, a major airline in my district, in my State, has some concern over it, and people who are concerned about tourism and the economic effects of this amendment. But I think this is a situation where, when we look back and think about 9/11, it would probably cost our economy $3 trillion if we have another attack of that magnitude. The cost of that, of reduced tourism, would pale in comparison to another $3 trillion cost to our economy if that should occur. I sincerely appreciate the chairman's willingness to cooperate with us, and I look forward to working with him on this issue. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Chairman, I am happy to join my colleagues in cosponsoring this important amendment. In many ways, the Border Protection, Antiterterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005 is a return to basics for a complete overhaul of our system of immigration. An integral component of the basics is the long overdue need for securing the most populous areas of our southern border with physical barriers. Like locking the door to your house before turning on the alarm, it only makes sense to begin enforcement of our border with physical barriers. My colleagues, Chairman Hunter, Chairman Dreier and Mr. Royce, have attested to the success of the border fence in California. I believe we can apply this success to other parts of our borders using additional fencing and 21st century technology. We need to stop the fluidness of our border before we consider any other immigration idea. In the words of a doctor, we need to stop the bleeding before we can stitch the wound, and constructing barriers on our borders is a critical first step toward curing this patient who has long suffered from inadequate therapy.

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

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Chairman, I believe that the Border Protection, Antiterterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005 needs to address a loophole in our immigration system. I have introduced this amendment which suspends, not cancels, but suspends temporarily the Visa Waiver Program until the machine-readable and tamper-resistant biometric identification system mandated by the PATRIOT Act to be the cornerstone of the entry-exit system is fully operational. Until we have the technical and human resources to secure our points of entry, we cannot afford to allow visitors to come to the United States without prescreening them prior to arrival. Despite the fact that the United Kingdom is one of our Nation's closest friends and allies, the London subway bombings earlier this year were executed in large part by British citizens with known ties to terrorism. We know that terrorists like Zacharias Moussaui and Richard Reid exploited the Visa Waiver Program to travel to the United States. Do we want individuals like these to fly to America unchecked and to attack our subway system in the name of terrorist groups like al Qaeda under the cloak of the Visa Waiver Program? Do we want French citizens with Islamofascist mindsets to get a free pass through Customs? If not, we need to suspend this program until we are equipped to check the criminal and terrorist backgrounds of every visitor who arrives at a point of entry and to confirm the identity of each visitor using biometric identifiers. The success and failure of the Visa Waiver Program can trace its roots back to 1986 when it was passed as part of the Immigration Reform Control Act. As many of my colleagues know, what we left undone in 1986 is in large part why we need to consider a new immigration reform law in 2005 that is consistent with the recent reauthorization of the PATRIOT Act. The Visa Waiver Program was only designed to be a temporary program for a small and select group of nations. Today, 27 countries are eligible under visa waivers, opening the door widely, widely, Mr. Chairman, for an unscreened terrorist to attack the United States. Yesterday, the United States USA PATRIOT and Terrorism Prevention Reauthorization Act of 2005 passed by a vote of 251-174, a strong endorsement for securing our Nation against terrorism. The PATRIOT Act acknowledges the problem of the Visa Waiver Program, and I have introduced this amendment to suspend the program until the solution made possible by the PATRIOT Act can realistically take effect. This is an issue that extends beyond apprehending illegal immigrants and actually works to secure our points of entry from those who desire to attack our Nation. Mr. Chairman, I include for the Record a letter from the 9/11 Families for a Secure America in full support of this amendment. 9/11 Families for a Secure America, December 15, 2005. Staten Island, NY, Hon. Phil Gingrey, Cannon House Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Gingrey, 9/11 Families for a Secure America fully supports your amendment to H.R. 4437 to suspend the Visa Waiver Program until the automated entry-exit control system authorized by the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 is fully implemented. The recent civil disturbances in France make it quite clear that the time is past when citizens of particular countries should be granted blanket permission to enter the United States without first applying for a visa. Many of the nations of Europe, after decades of permitting mass immigration from nations that sponsor terrorism have created a situation where large numbers of Islamic extremists, though closely connected to the terrorism that originates in countries such as Saudi Arabia, are themselves citizens or native born in any of a dozen European nations. The result is that Islamic extremism is no longer limited to persons born in or citizens of Middle Eastern nations. For this reason, citizens of European countries should be subject to the same visa application process which applies to the other nations of the world. If Islamic extremists commit another 9/11 it will not make any difference to the victims of that attack that the people responsible carried French passports rather than ones issued by Iran, Saudi Arabia or Lebanon. Sincerely, The Board of Directors, 9/11 Families for a Secure America Bruce DeCell, Sergeant, NYPD (retired), Father-in-law of Mark Petrocelli, age 29. Bill Doyle, father of Joseph, age 24, WTC North Tower. Lynn Faulkner, husband of Wendy, WTC South Tower. Peter and Jan Gadiel, parents of James, age 23, WTC, North Tower 103rd floor. Grace Godshalk, mother of William R. Godshalk, age 35, WTC South Tower 89th floor. Joan Molinaro, mother of firefighter Carl Molinaro. Will Sekzer, Detective Sergeant (retired) NYPD, father of Jason Sekzer, age 31, WTC North Tower 105th floor.

Mr. GINGREY

Mr. GINGREY. Madam Speaker, I rise today to encourage all Americans to talk with their loved ones about Medicare part D, the new voluntary prescription drug benefit available to all seniors. Now is the perfect time to assist a senior with this important decision. After all, many of us are about to spend the holiday season with several generations of our family, and it is easy to help. In fact, this past weekend, I help my mother, Helen Gingrey, enroll in a Medicare part D plan. Now, my mother is in her eighties, and while she is a sharp lady, she is not very familiar with computers, but together, we visited the Web site www.medicare.gov, and walked through the enrollment process. It took less than an hour, and now starting January 1, my mother will have affordable prescription drug coverage. If everyone in our community took the time to assist just one senior in this way we could help millions of seniors get access to the prescription drugs they need to stay well. Seniors can choose a plan and enroll by visiting the Web site www.medicare.gov, or by calling 1- 800-Medicare. Madam Speaker, I encourage all Americans to help a senior in their lives with this important health care decision.