Glenn Grothman

Mr. GROTHMAN

Mr. GROTHMAN. Madam Speaker, I would also like to speak on behalf of Congressman Keller's bill. One of the things we do as Congressmen back in our district is constituent work. Probably one of the areas which we are busiest is in the areas of helping our veterans. Whether it is getting burial benefits, veteran benefits, or lost military awards, we have to contact the National Personnel Records Center. Unfortunately, as has been mentioned, for over a year now, the National Personnel Records Center has been operating at well under capacity. This is an insult to our veterans. Their excuse for not operating is, of course, the COVID. My staff has toured the National Personnel Records Center, and it is a large warehouse, very spread out. Unlike where most Americans have had to work the last 2 years, you are not squeezed up in a cubicle next to somebody else. Unfortunately--and this maybe is an indication of the overall caring of the Federal Government. Unfortunately, they have not been open at a time when not only our veterans have given so much, but a time when so many taxpayers have been working around the clock. Every night I go home, I go by a couple of cheese factories. I can drive by there at 1 in the morning. They are packed with people. They never stopped working. Here we have a massive warehouse with lots of space between people, and we are told it is too dangerous to go to work. That is preposterous. It is an insult to our veterans. It is an insult to our taxpayers. I urge this body to pass Congressman Keller's bill as soon as possible.

Mr. GROTHMAN

Mr. GROTHMAN. Madam Speaker, a lot has been said about the reconciliation bill that we may or may not vote on. Obviously, the spending is tremendously out of control and will further fan the flames of inflation. There are several provisions in there designed, one more time, I would argue, to replace fathers and the family. Madam Speaker, today, I will address, one more time, the majority's obsession with abortion. We have already seen this cycle, efforts made in the White House to get rid of the Mexico City policy and have the United States involved in pushing abortion around the world, kind of a very strange and sad thing given how blessed this country has been by the Almighty during our tenure. In this bill, one more time, be it including $10 billion in public health funding grants that do not include the Hyde amendment, or abortion coverage for ObamaCare and plans covering individuals up to 138 percent of the Federal poverty line, this is one of the most extreme pro-abortion bills that I have seen yet, and it is another reason not to vote for the reconciliation bill.

Mr. GROTHMAN

Mr. GROTHMAN. Madam Speaker, last night on television, I listened as Jen Psaki--I don't know whether it was from yesterday or a replay from something a month ago--wondered why President Biden should go to the border. Having been down there, I want to educate her as to why. First of all, she would find we have a shortage of Border Patrol. Well over 10,000 unaccompanied minors a month are coming across the border, and because they have to deal with them, they are not able to guard the border. Rather than giving free college for illegals, you could get some more Border Patrol agents. Secondly, he would get to know that the Border Patrol agents are wonderful people, so that in the future, when agents on horses are charging a group of Haitians who are assaulting some woman, our hate- filled President does not attack the Border Patrol. Third, she can find out that immigrants are right now routinely throwing away identification cards so that we can't do background checks on them. Fourth, I always knew immigrants who tested positive for COVID are being let in. I was not aware that Border Patrol has a policy that we can never even force immigrants to take the tests.

Mr. GROTHMAN

Mr. GROTHMAN. Mr. Speaker, I would like to spend some time addressing the Chair and America on the American Rescue Plan or, actually, on the Build Back Better Act, which is kind of a follow-up on the American Rescue Plan. We know the result of that original big-spending, government-printing act was a big increase in inflation in the United States, apparent to one and all. This is a follow-up bill to that, which will further require the Federal Reserve to print more money, driving up the cost of gas, of food, of housing everywhere we look. But I am not going to address just the cost of this bill tonight. I am going to address the way I believe it will permanently change America and the vision the Democratic Party apparently has for America in the future. In this bill, we are adding 87,000 IRS agents. For quite a while, when I would give talks about this bill, I would talk about 8,700 because when my staff told me it was 87,000, I felt I had to correct them. Nobody would want to add 87,000 IRS agents. But I stand corrected. I was wrong. In this bill, we are adding 87,000 IRS agents, enough to fill up a massive American football stadium. Being from Wisconsin, I think of Camp Randall Stadium, where the University of Wisconsin plays. I think of Lambeau Field, where the Packers play. Somebody wants to hire that many IRS agents. It is not in the bill, but it is in conjunction with a proposal I think the Biden administration has, to monitor every $600 transfer of funds. What type of country would have this many IRS agents and want to know if you spend $600 on who knows what--giving to the politically incorrect church; giving to a politically incorrect nonprofit; giving money to a fringe, eccentric sibling; whatever. It sounds like something more you would think of in East Germany when East Germany was around rather than the United States. But that is apparently the vision of the party that put together the Build Back Better Act. As was just mentioned in this bill, we are adding money for more low- income apartments. Now, that sounds good. President Biden also recently increased the food stamp allowance. There is an author of mine that I suggest Americans read by the name of Theodore Dalrymple, an English author who was a doctor dealing both with English prisons and English slums. He talked about the empty lives that people who live what I will refer to as the welfare lifestyle that England had. He attributed that empty life to the fact that in England--and maybe they backed off this by now, but at least England 15 years ago, no matter how irresponsible you were, you always got a free apartment; you always got free food; and you always got free medical care. In other words, there was no responsibility when you got up in the morning to really accomplish anything because you would always be able to exist. We are close to that right now, but I am afraid the majority party wants to go all the way there when I look at this proposal. I hope the majority party stops and thinks in addition to the cost, more importantly, psychologically what will it do to the people of America if, when you graduate from high school or don't graduate from high school, if you want to, particularly if you have a child, you can live a lifestyle in which you can be completely irresponsible. You will always be able to eat and always be able to have a nice air- conditioned, heated apartment, which will probably have more square feet per person than the average housing in Europe, much less around the world. This will, again, change America for the worse. Psychologically, it will give people nothing to live for. By the way, since it is usually targeted at people with children, it also will create a sad situation we have already created in this country in which men will have less responsibility for taking care of their children. When you have no other responsibilities in life, it can lead to, first, an empty, depressed life; and, secondly, it can lead to--what?-- idle hands are the Devil's workshop. There are other things in this bill that will also change America. We are aiming for universal 3- or 4-year-old kindergarten, I guess you would call it. As a sidelight, this bill says that the people in these daycares, which is kind of what they are, need a college degree. That is a little bit of snobbery that we should put an end to, the idea that if I have a college degree, I am always better off than somebody who doesn't have a college degree. If you are applying for a job, we treat the hardworking, intelligent, commonsense person without a college degree as being, for some reason, less worthy of a higher paycheck than the lack of commonsense person who may not have a strong work ethic who does get a college degree. That is just a sidelight. A bad provision there. But another provision about this that is bad is you are taking the care of the 3- and 4-year-olds out of the parents and giving it exclusively to the government. Now, a given number of parents may prefer it, but I think throughout most of this country, the raising of the children has been primarily the responsibility of the family. I know the Marxist element in the other party does not want parents and, in particular, fathers too involved in their children's upbringing. But I feel this will again permanently change America. I should point out, if you look at the studies, American schools sometimes have bad test scores. But our test scores are pretty good in the fourth grade. In other words, our problem in this country isn't that the children are doing poorly when the parents take care of them. Those test scores for children in American schools are falling in middle school and high school. So the problem is later on. It is not with the 3- and 4-year-olds when the parents have responsibility. I should also point out that we are, in this bill, increasing Pell grants. Now, there are two problems there. Pell grants are grants going toward what we will refer to as low-income people, but they don't go to middle-class people. I am already getting complaints in my district from Pell grants in the past as couples, married couples who thought they were being responsible in raising their children, they find out their children might be going $30,000 or $40,000 in debt to get a college degree. But if the parents hadn't been working or hadn't been working as hard, those parents' children are eligible for free college. I know I am sure it always feels good to give more away, but put yourself in the place of the middle-class American family that is working to raise their child, a married couple, and you see somebody else next door not working very hard, and as a bonus, their children get free college, where the responsible middle-class kid winds up $30,000 or $40,000 in debt. Another example here of complete unfairness and perverse incentives. When I go back home, one of the major concerns of businesses is they can't find anybody to work. Now, I would hope everybody sometimes tours their businesses and is familiar with that. Obviously, hiring 87,000 new IRS agents is going to take 87,000 people away from the private sector. But another interesting proposal in this bill is we have a new expanded civilian conservation corps. In other words, we are taking more people away from the factories, the construction sites, the retail outlets that they so desperately need to hire them for the government, make them dependent on the government, but above all make sure they are not available for the private sector. Another big mistake. I mentioned the Pell grants and the fact that in a way they are a little bit of an insult to the middle-class kids who have to go further and further in debt. But another interesting provision about these Pell grants and another way that they clearly want to change America in this bill is you are eligible for the Pell grants if you are here illegally. This is not a mistake. I am not making this up. I am on both the Education and Labor Committee and the Budget Committee, where we tried to take this provision out, and the Democrats on those committees proudly defended the provision. They really believe that if you come here, you are entitled to free college, whereas if you are a member of a middle-class American working family, your children should go $30,000 to $50,000 in debt to get a college degree. I mean, it is almost beyond belief, but that is another one of the features of this bill and one of the reasons why I really hope it fails. Another feature of this bill, be it natural gas or methane, is increasing taxes, driving up the cost of energy in the United States. The environmentalists in this country may be interested to know that already the high cost of energy in the United States, and even more Europe, is causing more and more foundries, and I assume other factories as well, to go up in India, which is a much, much, much bigger pollution problem than the United States. So when you drive up the cost of energy, which is so very important for American factories in general and our foundries in particular, what this bill would do is ship more American manufacturing jobs abroad and increase the overall pollution in the United States as we have energy production go from the new, clean power plants in America to the much dirtier power plants in India, China, and from around the world. Other things in this bill that are a little bit irritating: After much effort, the Republicans, when they were in charge, required Social Security numbers for the child tax credits. Why did we require Social Security numbers? To make sure people are not filling out tax returns and getting tax refunds they aren't entitled to. I don't know why anybody would not want Social Security numbers so we can check to see if somebody says they have five children, they really have five children and get the money back. For whatever motivation--I can't even imagine what the motivation would be--in this bill the wonderful Democratic Party is saying, no, you don't need Social Security numbers to get refunds for your child tax credit, which will not just increase a form of welfare. This will increase a form of welfare cheating. Why you would do this, again I can't imagine. One other provision in this bill, not a fiscal provision, the Democrat Party is trying to allow, I would say, 8 to 11 million people currently here illegally to become legal. First of all, you are rewarding people who broke the law to come into this country. And secondly, when you make 8 to 11 million people legal who were previously illegal it is like putting a sign on the United States, which the drug cartels who are involved in all this illegal immigration, will show around the world: Come to the United States. We are not enforcing our immigration laws. Perhaps the majority party is not aware that already the drug gangs in both Central America and Brazil are taking out TV ads inviting people to come into the United States. Why do they do that? Because if you're in Central America, they may charge you 5 to $7,000 to come here. In Brazil they may charge you $10,000 to come here. And because there is money to be made for the drug gangs, they advertise, encouraging people to come here. Now, when we do something like, in essence, legalize people who are already here illegally, don't you think the drug gangs are going to educate the people in Central America as to what we are doing? Of course they are. So not only are you inviting people or creating people who are illegal or who were previously illegal, but, worse, you are giving a green light to anybody hanging out in other countries, now is the time to come to America. By the way, when I am down on the border, another thing I hear is the cooperation from the Mexican Government has been less and less over the 6 or 8 months as we try to control our border, not only to keep illegal people out but to keep the drugs out, as well. Our Border Patrol notices a little less cooperation from the Mexicans, and I can see why. They believe they are getting less cooperation because if the United States itself doesn't care about its own border, why should Mexican law enforcement risk their lives protecting the border and protecting the integrity of the border if the United States itself doesn't care? So here we have another provision which advertises the United States doesn't care about their immigration laws. I am sure the Mexican Border Patrol, the Mexican military is aware of it, and what will they think of it? Why should I risk my butt preventing people from coming here if the United States itself doesn't care? So, again, I encourage America to wake up. We are permanently changing the type of country that this is if this bill passes as is. So I encourage Americans to contact their legislators. Please don't pass this bill. Now, I will make two more brief comments for the press corps, if they are even paying attention to this. Like all Congressmen, I frequently get contacted on issues and asked whether I can look into it. Of course, agencies don't like to respond to requests from individual Congressmen, particularly Congressmen in the minority, but I think the press corps, which is so incredibly powerful, more powerful than they imagine, can get answers from bureaucratic agencies the way perhaps Congressmen cannot. And I am going to mention two requests here. I had requests from people of both parties, both Republicans and Democrats, as to what is in the videos when we had the attacks on this building on January 6. For whatever reason, those videos have not been made public. People would like to know what was going on. I would hope the press corps would apply a little bit of pressure to the appropriate authorities and make those videos public. Because from what I can tell, in my district both the on-the-ball Republicans and the on-the-ball Democrats wish we could see those videos. And I think if the press applied a little bit of pressure, we would see those videos. The other thing I am hearing from my constituents back home is they wonder about the apparent use of ivermectin in India. If you look at the popular Worldometer website, they will show a dramatic drop in fatalities in India over the last few months, just a shocking drop. People claim it is from ivermectin. I don't know if it is true or not. But the American news media ought to wake up and cover the story and find out if it is. If it is not from ivermectin, the American public should know it because then they have been sold a bill of goods. If it is from ivermectin, the American public should know that because maybe we have a way to greatly reduce the number of fatalities. So those are two requests that I have of our sometimes slumbering press corps. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GROTHMAN

Mr. GROTHMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. The topic for tonight, and rightfully so--when we look at the $3.5 trillion bill with so many things that will permanently change America--is some of the most radical immigration provisions we have ever seen. Predictions by the Democrats, themselves, will be that they will affect 9 to 12 million more people in this country who are not here legally and will ultimately lead to a huge change in America. This has nothing to do with legal immigration. Every year in this country about 800,000 people are sworn in as citizens. They are appropriately vetted, they have jobs, they are not committing crimes, and they are added to our citizenry. I am talking about the people who are coming across the border claiming they want asylum. I was down at the border last week to have a look at some of these people who apparently people feel will make good citizens. One of the first things you notice, at least in the Yuma sector in Arizona, is you look at the path of people coming here, the path is littered with identification that is being thrown away by people who want to get in this country. Now, why would people throw away identification? Normally you keep your identification because you have nothing to fear. If you are throwing the identification on the ground, it means you are creating a new identity when you come here. These are the type of people that under this bill are eventually going to work their way to become American citizens. And it is not surprising. The Democratic Party in many other ways has made it clear the type of people we want to get are not the type of people normally sworn in. Look at all the sanctuary cities or sanctuary counties around the country. And by having a sanctuary city or a sanctuary county to me it is an invitation to say you are going to go on public assistance. We are sending in children without their parents. People normally would like to have an intact family, but what we are doing in this bill is we are going to encourage more parents to send their underage children to the United States not knowing what will happen to them. Under this bill as the word gets out that the United States does not care about enforcing laws and more people come here, it will inevitably mean more illegal drugs in the country under this bill. And we are now in a position in which over 90,000 Americans are already dying every year primarily of COVID but also from other drugs that pass through the border. The only thing in this bill that you would expect to have--given the $3.5 trillion number, you would expect to have maybe more money spent that is immigration related--is more border patrol agents. But as in their regular budget, that is not something that they feel we need more of. So, again, I beg the American people. I know it is easy to get lost among the $3.5 trillion in spending, but I beg the American people to rise up against this bill because of the massive green light for illegal immigration that is going to come if it passes.

Mr. GROTHMAN

Mr. GROTHMAN. Mr. Speaker, we had another week go by, and I didn't see the Vice President in charge of the Mexican border policy for this administration down there, so I felt I should go down and look around in the Yuma sector and report back to her or anybody in the majority party who wants to hear. These are the things that I don't think we have seen in the papers. I could talk for hours. One thing, a large number of the people crossing the border in the Yuma sector are throwing away their IDs on the ground. And if you want, you can just stand there along the paths and see all the IDs that are just lying there. You have to ask yourself, why, if I am an immigrant, am I throwing away my ID before I check in with Border Patrol? I must be hiding something. It means that they can't do a background check if I was in the United States in the past, or, for that matter, there is going to be no record of when such and such a person left Colombia and comes into the United States. We should require an ID to come here. We should no longer let people throw them out. Secondly, I, in the past, am under the impression that people can test positive for COVID, check into a hotel and just leave and come into the country. I now know they do not require tests. These are two more things I learned at the border. I invite the Vice President to go down there.

Mr. GROTHMAN

Mr. GROTHMAN. Madam Speaker, I urge the American people not to take their eyes off the ball. I honestly sometimes believe the reason the majority party is putting people like Steve Bannon in the headlines, or mandatory vaccines, as horrible as they are, or driving up the cost of gas to over $3 per gallon, it is to cause the American public to avert their eyes from the most long-term dangerous policy that the Biden administration is implementing, and that is what is going on, on the border. I was down on the border last Thursday in the Yuma sector. So the American public understands, there are nine sectors along the border, and every time I go down there, I find more things that should scare the American people to death. First of all, we have just the sheer number of people who are crossing the border. A year ago in July, for all nine sectors, an estimated 8,000 people were crossing the border. We are now up to over 100,000 people a month crossing the border. As far as the type of people coming across the border, I saw something in the Yuma sector I hadn't seen before, and that is dozens of identifications scattered along the ground where people crossed from Mexico into Arizona. Why are people throwing away their identification prior to checking in at the Border Patrol? There is only one obvious reason. They don't want the United States to know who they are. These people are paying the drug cartels to come here. If you are from Mexico, you are paying $3,000 or $4,000 a person. If you are from Central America, you are paying $6,000 to $8,000 a person. If you are from Brazil, you are paying over $10,000 a person. The drug cartels are recruiting people by putting on Central American TV or Brazilian TV ads urging people to come here. There are some Americans who are taking out ads telling people it is not all it is cracked up to be to turn yourself over to the drug cartels. But right now, clearly, many people are crossing the border. These are not people, by the way, coming across in desperation. They are people with very top-of-the-line shoes or top-of-the-line purses, well- done hair, well-done nails. People have to realize that people are not always coming here out of even a little bit of desperation. They are coming here because it has been advertised they will make more money coming here. As far as families, in July, in all nine sectors, there were about 15,000 unaccompanied children coming here. You go down there and see children in what can only be described as pens, being held on mats as they wait for the United States to transport them wherever they want. They write on their clothes which address they should be delivered to, and we turn the children over to nonprofit organizations that will transfer these children to New York, to Denver, wherever they want to go. It drives the Border Patrol up the wall because, of course, if any American took a 5-year-old child and dropped them off at the airport and said, ``Please deliver this child to Oregon,'' or Maryland or wherever, social services would be after them. But the United States, due to neglect, has pushed a policy in which people south of the border are encouraged to turn their children over to the Border Patrol and transfer them wherever they want. Of course, as we have more and more children come here, the Border Patrol cannot patrol the border because they have to spend all their time processing the little children. The more Border Patrol is not patrolling the border, the more people are just walking in here, without any vetting at all. Last year in the Yuma sector, they would be processing maybe 25 people a day. This year it can be up to 700 people a day. And it is not a difficult thing. The way they treat each other is kind of a sign that maybe they might not make the greatest people to have around America. They needed help recently because of fights between the Haitians and the Colombians. Is that a sign of the type of people that we are letting into our country? Other things that you learn down there: In the past, when I would go down to the border, I was under the impression that if people had any symptoms, they were tested for COVID. Now, we don't want another 100,000 people a month here under any circumstances. But right now, I was told that we like to test them, but of course, you can't require people to be tested, which means we are letting people in this country who may well have COVID. Now, I don't know what to make of that. I guess what I make of it is when the Biden administration requires mandatory vaccines for people, it is really not that important. They are just doing it to avert people's eyes because if it were that important, they would be requiring at least tests for people coming over the border. But they don't even require tests. We will just let them come here. Other activities of the Biden administration clearly are acting as magnets to bring more people here. One of the reasons why the people on the Mexican side of the border, the Mexican military, does not seem to care as much now as they did a year ago is because why should they risk their lives taking on the drug cartels when the American Government, by all of their actions, indicate that they don't care whether we enforce the border? Two examples. We have, of course, as well advertised free medical care for people coming here, and there are Border Patrol agents who believe people just come to the United States for the free, superior medical care. In the reconciliation bill that is being passed here, people who come here illegally are getting free college. Talk about a magnet to come to the United States. Of course, it shows contempt for the American middle class that we are seeing more and more. If you are a member of the American middle class and want to go to college, you take out those student loans, go $30,000 in debt, go $40,000 in debt, go $50,000 in debt. But if you are somebody showing up here illegally, you get free college. Talk about advertising that our administration does not even remotely care whether our immigration laws are being obeyed or not. The other thing that we have moving through here, again, on the reconciliation package is we believe about 10 million more people coming here, who we did not appropriately, vet are going to be eligible for amnesty and allowed to become American citizens, which is a further magnet, bringing more people here. While there are a lot of things filling up the newspapers today-- well, people don't read newspapers, but a lot of things filling up the TV screen or the computer screen--I want the American people to contact their legislators and pay attention to what is going on at the border. There are people right now who permanently want to change America, and they are going to get away with it unless there is more of an uproar here saying: ``Get that immigration stuff out of the reconciliation package. Finally hire some more Border Patrol agents to see what is going on down there. And please, please, please go back, Biden administration, to the Mexican Government and renegotiate deals where we keep people south of the border.'' By the way, while I am talking about things that indicate there is a complete lack of caring on the southern border on the part of the Biden administration, when was the last time we saw Vice President Kamala Harris at the border? I tell you, if you go down to the border there are all sorts of Congressmen poking around, seeing what is going on with the most important issue facing America today. Where exactly is Kamala Harris, as she just brazenly ignores this crisis? Please, America, wake up, and defend our southern border.

Mr. GROTHMAN

Mr. GROTHMAN. Madam Speaker, I hope the American public is paying attention as we have three bills moving through here, including the reconciliation bill. In the year that we just finished, which included some supposedly once-in-a-lifetime COVID spending bills, 41 percent of the money spent by the government was borrowed. President Biden has laid out his dream for what will happen in fiscal year 2022, and now that we are back to normal, he still is borrowing 31 percent of the budget. Think about that. That would be like saying if you are making $60,000 a year, next year I am going to spend $90,000 a year. The top line numbers on this are just unbelievable. And these numbers are without taking into account the almost certain increases in interest rates that we are going to have to pay on our Federal debt. I would say there are so many horrible parts of this bill, but I think the most dangerous part is, in addition to not funding the southern border, there are provisions in here clearly designed to have a dramatic increase in the number of illegal immigrants, which will turn into legal citizens. Right now, America is used to having about 800,000 a year sworn in as new citizens. Pro-immigration groups suggest that this bill would add, in one shot, over 10 million new immigrants. Just disastrous. Among other carrots to get more immigrants here, we are giving away free Pell grants, which is to say free scholarships if you come here illegally. That is almost hard to believe, at a time that the average American, middle-class kid is paying $20,000, $30,000, $40,000, $50,000 in debt to get his college degree and is going to wind up in debt into his forties. If you come here illegally under this crazy bill, we are going to give you free college. Unbelievable. Permanently changing America to say the government should take care of 3- and 4-year-olds when there is no evidence or scant evidence that this will improve the outcomes for American children and their education system, all you are doing is, I think, following an absolute horrible ideology that says that the government ought to be the ones taking care of the children. As far as families are concerned--increasing the marriage penalty, be it increase the marriage penalty for the earned income tax credit, increase in the marriage penalty on Pell grants, putting out more low- income housing, which is also designed to break down the families and further erode the stability of future generations. Madam Speaker, I strongly urge my colleagues to vote no on the massive increase in the number of citizens here, the massive increase and the role the government plays in American life, and begin to restore themselves to some fiscal competence.

Mr. GROTHMAN

Mr. GROTHMAN. Madam Speaker, we discussed last week some of the issues that are of significance, and I don't think the press is paying enough attention to them. We just had a little bit more progress toward the development of fenofibrate, which is a generic drug, which some researchers from Israel have had some success on in curing COVID. I want to talk about these successes and then talk what is going to be necessary to have happen to get this potentially lifesaving drug in the mainstream. Two researchers from Israel found 15 people who were on oxygen and had pneumonia; and of the 15 people, after giving them fenofibrate, a generic drug available for very little, they got out of the hospital in 5 days. The other took, I think, it was 14 days. That is pretty incredible stuff. If it could be used routinely, it would dramatically have reduced the number of deaths in this country. Right now there are a variety of people around the world trying to do research on this topic, including the University of Pennsylvania, and they are grateful they got some money from the U.S. Government. But given the promise of this drug, I think they should have gotten a lot more money to deal with it quickly. I have talked to the researchers, and they think they will be able to get together. I guess they need 700 patients before they can make a determination. They think they will be able to make a determination that this is a good drug by the end of March. That is not quick enough. If they had more money and more push, they would be able to get more potential patients, and I would like to think get a final determination by the end of December. So I am calling on my colleagues in Congress, as well as the NIH and the CDC, to highlight fenofibrate. It is also known as Tricor. It has been around a long time without dangerous side effects. Maybe there will be side effects with COVID, but there wasn't dangerous side effects otherwise. It has been used by millions of people. I am going to be circulating a letter, hoping that the administration wakes up and does something and does something quickly. And by the way, this doesn't only cure it, but one of the underpublicized problems with COVID is that if you get it, it can result in long-lasting problems, problems to your lungs, problems to your organs. It appears, tentatively, that fenofibrate will clear up those problems quicker and not as many people will have those problems. I am afraid from what I read that COVID is going to be around a long time. I know people who have gotten it after being vaccinated; not as bad, I guess, but they have gotten it. So again, I hope that this institution moves, and I hope the administration moves and hope we can move at warp speed and get a final determination on fenofibrate by the end of December. I would also like to address, given what has happened over the last week, what I believe is the biggest crisis facing the country today, and that is the problem at the southern border. The numbers are well known. Last July 8,000 people crossing the border, staying in the country. This year, 105,000, and a lot of people think that is a low number. The increase, the percentage increase wasn't quite as great in August. But, again, it was a substantial increase at a time of year where it is very hot and normally people aren't crossing the border. We know the effects. I also don't think it has been as publicized as it should be. The huge number of people who are dying of illegal drugs, clearing 90,000 in a year for the first time in this country. When I first got this job, 45,000 a year was a lot. Every politician had to say we wanted to do something to fight illegal drug use. Now that we have fentanyl, an especially dangerous drug, we have more than doubled the number of people dying. Politicians barely talk about it. But obviously that situation has been exacerbated at the southern border. My local sheriffs are saying, ``Glenn, why aren't they doing anything to stop this coming across the southern border?'' Think of all the families, the people who have died from illegal drug use. You think of all the humanitarian problems in addition to the huge financial impact this is going to have on America. I have been down at the border looking at the little children in pens, under 8 years old, unaccompanied by parents, staying there. What is going to become of these children? Apparently we don't care. We continue to let the system go on. We continue to allow the word go out around the world, not just Central America, but South America, Asia, everywhere, Russia, Cuba, Haiti, more and more people coming in this country. And every day we don't do something, the word gets out and the number continues to go up. But what I would like to address is how have some Members--I hope not that many. But currently the reconciliation bill that is under consideration, you read about it in the paper, how do they respond? Do they respond with more Border Patrol agents? No, we are going to keep the Border Patrol understaffed. Do they respond with a wall? Which whenever anybody thinks about it, whenever I am on the border talking to local law enforcement, talking to the Border Patrol, all thought the wall was a good idea. No, we are not going to respond that way. We are going to look at the crisis and change immigration law to dramatically increase the number of people coming here, whether it is increasing the number of green cards, increasing chain migration. Right now, and something that I think would end the United States as we know it, if this reconciliation bill passes, it will result in a dramatic increase in immigration. So instead of doing what anybody with an ounce of common sense would say, and let's hire more Border Patrol agents for the border, we go the other way and say we don't have enough people in this country. We are near record levels of the number of current Americans who have been born abroad. Immigrants are fine. I think in 2018 we swore in, I believe, 830,000 new citizens. But to respond to the crisis at the border, all the Haitians being let in, all the people from around the world to say let's change immigration law and let's dramatically increase the number of people who are coming here legally, to boot, is just crazy. It is unfair to all the people who have done things right. And it is up to us to make sure that in the future, people who come here have their years in doing jobs, are appropriately vetted, and make sure they are good citizens. Not to slap dash say, as scandalous as things are at the border, let's let in a lot of new people here as chain migration relatives or that many more green cards as well. So I beg this body to wake up. I beg the press corps to wake up as far as what is going on at the border, as well as what is going on in the reconciliation bill, and let the American public know what is going on. I realize that the reconciliation bill is long and complicated. We can't cover it all. But at least the American public ought to know what we are voting on before we destroy America. In addition to the generosity that is in the bill as well that further serves as a carrot to bring people here. We have a provision in there to give free Pell grants, free scholarships to people who are coming here illegally. Which, of course, will further encourage more people to come here. I still find that hard to believe. That if that bill passes as is, the average middle-class American will be expected to owe $20,000, $40,000, $50,000 in debt and may or may not get something available at the university. But if you show up at the southern border because you don't have a lot of money and are considered poor, you will get free college. I mean, no wonder people are coming here when they see the type of bills that our Congress propose. But above all, the other provisions are going to result in huge increases in immigration, and I beg the press corps to cover that. I would like to thank you for giving me this time to address these two problems, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GROTHMAN

Mr. GROTHMAN. Mr. Speaker, I would like to address the most immediate, but still underpublicized, crisis facing America today. No country can afford unlimited immigration. In 2018, 830,000 people were sworn in as new citizens, as they spent years in America proving they were the moral citizens John Adams said were necessary to keep our Republic. Now record numbers of unvetted immigrants, including, we believe, over 10,000 Haitians at the border, are flooding in our country. We have been processing over 200,000 immigrants at the border each of the last 2 months, many of which are turned around; but in July over 100,000 immigrants were let in. That is in comparison to 8,000 immigrants being let in a year earlier. It appears in August we will be at another 90,000 people coming in. Because of the flood of refugees, the Border Patrol must do paperwork so that 224 miles of the Texan border is largely unguarded. People I talk to in Border Patrol believe that the official number of 31,000 got-aways is probably understated. It is hard not to conclude that this is happening by design. Recently, the Biden administration extended temporary protective status, causing drug cartels to inform people all around the world that the border is open. I should point out, by the way, when people talk about the Haitians, these are not people who are coming here from Haiti. These are Spanish- speaking people who already were in places like Chile, for example. They are not coming here because they have nowhere else to go; they have somewhere else to go. They are coming here because they received a message from the Biden administration that we are not guarding our borders. It is apparent they feel the over 800,000 legally vetted immigrants are not enough. It is kind of amazing. I don't know where the press is in this. The press ought to wake up. Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, other than her 1-day photo op, have largely ignored the border. Wouldn't you think they would be getting nothing but questions as far as what is going on, on the border? Why aren't you down there? Why aren't you seeing what is going on? This will destroy America. America must wake up. Two weeks ago in the Education and Labor Committee, apparently in an effort to further increase illegal immigration, all 28 Democrats voted specifically to give Pell grants, which is free college, to illegal immigrants--it is unbelievable--while the middle-class families in America are forced to go tens of thousands of dollars in debt to get their college. We are specifically saying that if you come here illegally, we will give you free college--unbelievable--in addition to promises of free healthcare. It is no wonder that so many people are flooding across our border. By the way, I want to give our President something to think of. When we appear so weak at the border, I think it tells other countries around the world that we are weak, as well. I don't know what President wants to be known as the weak President, but you don't think that other countries like Iran, groups like the Taliban, Russia, are observing this and taking the measure of what Joe Biden is as he lets people flood across the border? By the way, we are also finally at a point at which 90,000 Americans are dying every year of illegal drug overdoses. My local law enforcement, who have to deal with the families of the people who die largely because of fentanyl coming across the southern border, wonder why more isn't being done down there. But again, it seems to be, well, middle-class Americans dying of drug overdoses, that is not the priority. So we continue to allow floods coming across the border. It has been well-publicized that illegal immigrants are coming into America with COVID and other diseases, further causing me to wonder about the sincerity of some of the things that President Biden has said. I do wonder whether or not the vaccine mandates at the very time that tens of thousands of people are flooding across the border every month, and I do have to wonder about this bizarre bill on Friday, which is certainly going to get headlines as the majority of the House of Representatives votes to legalize abortion until birth, is it an effort to cause the press and even our supposedly conservative news outlets to avert their eyes from the border, as they have to focus on vaccine mandates and 8\1/2\-month abortions? In any event, I am calling on America to wake up. I realize there is not an election now, but you better make your voice heard, or we are going to lose the border.

Mr. GROTHMAN

Mr. GROTHMAN. Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring an underreported story up for the attention of the majority party, the Biden administration, and our press corps. People are debating masks and mandatory vaccines. I talked to a local coroner, and they have recently found most of their COVID deaths are already vaccinated people. What if we found a cure? Israeli researchers recently found that fenofibrate, also called TriCor, a long-used anticholesterol drug, cured 14 of 15 elderly patients with comorbidities who were already on oxygen with pneumonia in less than a week. The other one was cured within 14 days. It also dramatically reduced the damage many COVID patients suffer after the cure. Wouldn't it be great if COVID could be cured for less than $20 a day? Fenofibrate. That is two F's in fenofibrate. Google The Jerusalem Post. I beg the CDC or NIH to take action. The press should publicize this and ask why the politicians aren't doing more to bring this to market and curing COVID.

Mr. GROTHMAN

Mr. GROTHMAN. Madam Speaker, due to an important meeting, I missed the rollcall. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall No. 276. members recorded pursuant to house resolution 8, 117th congress Babin (Nehls) Boyle, Brendan F. (Jeffries) Carter (TX) (Calvert) DeFazio (Brown) DeSaulnier (Thompson (CA)) Escobar (Garcia (TX) Frankel, Lois (Clark (MA)) Fulcher (Johnson (OH)) Grijalva (Garcia (IL)) Higgins (NY) (Tonko) Johnson (TX) (Jeffries) Kim (NJ) (Underwood) Kirkpatrick (Levin (CA)) Latta (Walberg) Lawson (FL) (Evans) McEachin (Wexton) Meng (Jeffries) Morelle (Tonko) Napolitano (Correa) Payne (Wasserman Schultz) Porter (Wexton) Reschenthaler (Meuser) Rice (SC) (Timmons) Rush (Underwood) Ryan (Kildee) Sewell (Cicilline) Stanton (Levin (CA)) Stefanik (Miller-Meeks) Strickland (Torres (NY)) Swalwell (Veasey) Vela (Correa) Wagner (Walorski) Wilson (FL) (Hayes) Amendment No. 26 Offered by Mr. Mfume

Mr. GROTHMAN

Mr. GROTHMAN. Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to respond a little bit to the statement made prior to the gentleman from Louisiana. I think maybe some of the public was misled into believing that people, the Haitians crossing our southern border are coming here from Haiti. They are actually living quite comfortably or at least adequately in Brazil and Chile and are not coming here out of necessity. They are coming here because of a change in policy in special immigration status instituted by the Biden administration which, as expected, has resulted in Haitians coming here from other countries than Chile. Now, tonight there are many issues that should be debated. We have the crisis at the border. We still have the crisis in Afghanistan, we have more mundane inflation here at home, we have the racial hatred trying to be incited by the majority party. But in the midst of all these other issues, they have decided on Friday, over 220 of them are planning to vote on something called the Women's Health Protection Act. I haven't seen a more morally reprehensible piece of legislation in all my time in public life. This legislation is going to legalize abortion up to the date of birth. So you understand, right now that will put us as one of seven countries worldwide who are in that ballpark, and only three other countries would have a bill so extreme--Red China, North Korea, and Vietnam--all countries in the recent past--and things have turned around a little in China--countries that proudly shut down religion and in particular Christianity, though it has bounced back a little in China. So there we are. Are you proud? United States, North Korea, North Vietnam, Red China. This bill will legalize abortion up to the date of birth. Unbelievable. You have to realize in this country throughout most of our history abortion was illegal. Abortion was illegal even though we didn't have ultrasounds, and it wasn't so obvious how horrific it is. So what did we respond to with about 50 years of ultrasounds in this country? We look at those ultrasounds, and we send people to Congress who say: Let's kill those children. I also want to point out there are some moderating bills around the various States which were designed to at least give the people some ability to back away from some of these horrific abortions. When I was in the State legislature, I authored a bill, it was a 24- hour waiting period bill, and I talked to plenty of women who were bullied into abortions by boyfriends or parents and regretted it. So we passed a 24-hour waiting period bill, and after they showed up at the abortionist, they looked at the literature they had received, looked at the ultrasounds and turned around. There is some evidence that because of that bill about one in seven women changed their mind and would not return for the second appointment. But apparently that was too much for the majority party. We cannot give women a 24-hour waiting period. We have to have that abortion soon after they enter the clinic. The next thing that really intrigues me is some States have gone after sex-selective abortion. Perhaps since the majority party wants to invite people from all over the world here, they like the cultural change which some people view around the world, they view a baby girl as somewhat less desirable than a baby boy, and therefore they want to kill that baby girl. Of course, here in the United States we are offended by such a thing, and States pass bills saying we are not going to have sex-selective abortions. But apparently it is time to weigh in, the majority party feels, time to weigh in into an area which has traditionally been the purview of the States and say: No, no, we can't have States having such a law. We have to go back to the days in which you would come and do the ultrasound, and say: Oh, it looks like a little girl, better get rid of this one right away. That is apparently what the majority party wants to make legal. I want the American people to wake up. We need a moral reawakening in this country. Wake up and realize that the majority of the House of Representatives on this Friday is going to stand up and say abortion is legal virtually until birth. They are going to say it is wrong for any State to say you need a 24- hour waiting period, it is wrong to say that we want to stop the sex- selective abortions. Wake up, America. We are in the middle of a moral free fall.

Mr. GROTHMAN

Mr. GROTHMAN. Mr. Speaker, I was engaged in an important meeting. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall No. 264.

Mr. GROTHMAN

Mr. GROTHMAN. Madam Speaker, we are back from our August break, and there are three issues of tremendous importance that Congress ought to deal with and the press corps ought to be dealing with. I can understand, by the way, why President Biden wants to change his view over a few months ago and go for mandates on the vaccine, because these other issues are issues that I am sure would be uncomfortable for him to address, but they are important for the press corps and important for the American people to address. The first issue is: the Del Rio sector of the Mexican border is out of control. We all see the 15,000 people under the bridge, but what is the consequence of that? What is the consequence of having 2 months in a row of over 200,000 people show up at the border? The Border Patrol has to get off the border, they have to shuffle people around from the Del Rio section to the El Paso section or to the Laredo section. They have to take care of all of the unaccompanied minors coming in here, and when they do that, they cannot guard the border. Things are out of control. Not only are the agents in that area not able to focus on the area, but things are such a disaster, we are having to bring agents off the northern border to make up for the huge problems on the southern border. What happens? We wind up in a situation which not only are there more got-aways, people aren't even being processed crossing the border, but we also have a situation in which more drugs are coming off the border. The American public still hasn't been told enough that in the last year we have had over 90,000 people die of drug overdoses, largely from fentanyl coming across the Mexican border, and that is what happens when you have 224 miles barely monitored. The Haitians are being brought here or encouraged to come here by the drug gangs. Why are they able to do this? It didn't happen by coincidence that you saw all these people under the bridge last week and they weren't over there a month ago. The Biden administration has extended the Temporary Protected Status for people coming here from Haiti. When they changed this process, it was a recruiting tool for the gangs who want more people to come here. I am going to emphasize, Haiti is not a very nice country, but these people are not coming from Haiti. They are coming here from Chile, they are coming here from Brazil, they are coming from Venezuela. Why are they coming from these other countries? It is not because they are in danger in Chile and Brazil. They are coming here because they can make more money here, and the drug cartel gangs are explaining that to them. These gangs are charging these Haitians at least $50,000 a person to come here, which is the reason why they are so involved in this. Meanwhile, where is the President? Where is our moderate Joe Biden? Where is Kamala Harris, the expert on the border, as we have this disaster going on at the southern border, out of control, people going from the United States to Mexico, back Mexico to the United States? Wake up, press corps, and find out how much money the gangs are making on this. Why are we processing over 200,000 people at the southern border for 2 months in a row? Things we haven't seen for over 20 years. No wonder some of the press corps, the irresponsible press corps--and no wonder Joe Biden wants to focus on vaccine mandates. Because focusing on vaccine mandates takes our eyes off the border that is out of control. It is up to Congress to step forward, have some more committee hearings on this, do something, bring some bills to the floor. I know there is going to be a CR coming through, there is going to be a bill to break the debt ceiling coming through. I would ask the President, the Speaker, give us some more Border Patrol agents to deal with our empty border. That is the first thing all Americans should be concerned about. They should be asking their Congressmen, they should be asking their Senators, what is being done to prevent 200,000 people from showing up at the border? What is being done when over 200 miles of the Mexican border is left, to a degree, unguarded? Are they at all concerned about the 90,000 people who died in the last year of illegal drug use, primarily fentanyl flowing across the southern border? What is being done about all the people coming from the other countries? Remember, you did not see all these people under the bridge 2 or 3 months ago. Why? Again, it is not just a random thing. It is because of a change in the Temporary Protected Status extended by President Biden, which results in the huge mess that we have. But that is not the only thing that hasn't been covered anywhere near enough. There is an issue that the press should be focusing on more with regard to the COVID situation. I know a lot of the focus is on the vaccine, but we have to realize that many people have gotten the vaccine over the last 6 months. We also have a situation in which people have been working on cures for the disease. Right now, most days over 1,000--kind of averaging about 1,500--people die every day from COVID. So is there any cure for COVID that the CDC is letting sit on the table? Over a year ago scientists in Israel announced hope for a generic drug called fenofibrate, or Tricor, which has been used safely to treat people for high cholesterol for years. Recently, these Israeli scientists have revealed that they took 15 people, all of which had severe COVID, all of which needed oxygen, and in 4 days, 4 to 6 days, 14 of the 15 were out of the hospital after they were given fenofibrate, which cost a grand total of $1.50 a day. The other patient got out of the hospital within 2 weeks. You would think this is good news for the CDC, particularly given the billions of dollars that we have given them. Unfortunately, they are not getting enough assistance to do further trials in this country. Think if this 15-patient outfit were typical of the population as a whole. 15 for 15 cured. And not only cured. A lot of people today with COVID, even when they are cured, have permanent or almost permanent side effects. But here the side effects are a fraction of what they were on people who didn't take fenofibrate. So I beg the CDC or anybody in the administration who is listening, we brought this to their attention before, see what you can do to have the vast sum of money and the U.S. Government weigh in to see if we can have stronger trials with more people on the fenofibrate, and we can get ourselves in a position in which soon if someone does wind up going to the hospital, if someone does wind up needing oxygen, they are given the fenofibrate, and they can wind up like the 15 patients they have already tried this on, all of which are apparently doing very well and are even getting rid of the symptoms that people who have had COVID sometimes hang onto for months and months and months. If we have anybody out there listening from the CDC, listening from the NIH, I would ask them to familiarize themselves with the study. It is fenofibrate. It has been well covered in The Jerusalem Post. Why, in a time when we have 1,200 to 1,500 Americans dying every day of COVID, is this not something that is being pushed? I strongly encourage our health establishment to familiarize themselves with what right now looks like a miracle drug. My final comment is with regard to the pro-life issue. When you consider the hundreds of thousands of people who would have been born every day in this country but who have their lives cut short before they are born, you can see why this is another issue that our press corps should be talking about, our churches should be talking about. Already there have been big changes of policy under the new administration. First of all, in the past, under the Mexico City policy, if money was going to an international organization, if that international organization was performing abortions, they could not have the money. We changed that, President Biden changed it, saying: You can't use that money directly for an abortion, but since money is fungible, your organization can take the good name of the United States and use it to proselytize, use it after switching money around to have the U.S. assist in performing abortions around the world. The second thing they did is under Title X, money going out, again to nonprofit organizations, in the past if these organizations referred for abortion, they couldn't get the money. Change that policy, so the type of organizations who work towards legalizing or work towards normalizing abortion got more money. They wouldn't get the money in the past because it was too much a part of their mission to perform abortions. But one more time, they are going to be getting money. But now we have a new bill coming up, and I think all Americans have to stop and think what is happening when it has come to this in America. This bill will legalize abortion nationwide almost or perhaps all the way to birth. Now, throughout most of our country's history, abortion was illegal. It is kind of amazing, abortion was illegal before they had ultrasounds, before people could see actually what was going on. I had felt when I began to get involved in public life that when ultrasounds become available, the number of abortions would drop. But despite the ultrasounds, things continue on ahead, in part because powerful organizations continue to hold abortion as a way out of a pregnancy. But it is truly shocking that I believe a majority of people in this Chamber are going to vote to say that we have abortions right up to birth and get rid of even minor laws that are postponing the abortions otherwise. When I was in the State of Wisconsin, I authored a bill putting in a 24-hour waiting period for abortion. I talked to the women who were bullied by their boyfriends or cajoled by their parents into having abortions, and they felt it was very important that there be some sort of waiting period after you went to the office of the abortionist one time that you got a chance to stop, step back, and think. I think there are a lot of other places in our society where doctors or other people put a waiting period out there knowing that it is a very important decision, and you are never going to be able to change your mind once you make that decision. But under the extreme bill that we are going to be voting on later this week, they are going to say, no, we can't have that. Once they get you in that clinic on day one they can perform that abortion right away, and we are not going to give you 24 hours or 40 hours or whatever it is around the country to stop and maybe change your mind. That is the type of thing that is going to be passed in the U.S. House of Representatives. It doesn't take many people to change their mind and say, you know, I may consider myself so-called pro-choice, but the idea of saying that it is legal to perform an abortion a few hours after you walk in the abortion clinic, I just can't go that far. And I hope some of my colleagues who think they are going to vote for the bill later this week change their mind. I hope they change their mind on things like sex selective abortion. We know in other cultures, and I happen to think we have a better culture by a mile, but in other cultures it is apparently not unusual to do, see whether they are going to have a boy or girl and if it is not what you want, we are going to end the life of that child before it is born. Some States have made that illegal. Well, some people in Congress apparently feel they know better. We are going get rid of that law, and we are going to cut that life short just because maybe let's say it is a girl, and we were hoping for a boy. I can see why certain members of the press wouldn't want to talk about this, and I can see why certain members of the administration wouldn't talk about this. I don't know what I would do, how I would explain such a radical bill. So, in any event, I will leave the public with those three things to think about. Think about over 200,000 people a month at the border. Think about the Border Patrol stuck processing people, not able to monitor the border. Think of all the drugs coming across. Think of the 5,000 and up that the people coming across are having to give these drug gangs in Mexico further strengthening their power. I ask you to think about like they have covered in the Jerusalem Post what is going on with the fenofibrate and the fact you can think how many lives we would save of the approximately 1,500 people a day that are still dying of COVID. And I want you to think about that bill being passed on Friday and whether it is right for the heavy hand of Congress to say not only can you have an abortion up to birth, but we are even going to get rid of laws like a waiting period law or get rid of laws like a sex selective law. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GROTHMAN

Mr. GROTHMAN. Madam Speaker, obviously a lot is going on in America right now, and with all the focus on what is going on in Afghanistan, as well as the latest spending bills going through Congress, we are perhaps losing track of the thing that I think will have the biggest impact on America over the next few years. I beg the American public and the American media not to lose sight of what is going on at our southern border. In the last couple of weeks, it has become apparent that, by an estimate, 105,000 people crossed over the border into that country as opposed to 80,000 in June; over a 30 percent increase in 1 month, almost entirely unremarked; of that is an estimated 15,000 unaccompanied minors, which is a human relations tragedy. It is going to further increase the amount of illegal drugs in this country. Right now, 90,000 people a year are dying of illegal drugs. It is hard to believe that this time last year only an estimated 8,000 people were coming in the country, whereas, this July, again, we are at 105,000. It should be banner headlines in any newspaper in this country when we go from about 10,000 people to 105,000 people per month.

Mr. GROTHMAN

Mr. GROTHMAN. Madam Speaker, as we head into the 6-or 7-week break, it is important that Americans and Congress not forget the number one crisis facing this Nation, and that is the takeover of our southern border by Mexican drug gangs. Right now, the drug gangs, because we are kind of tardy at guarding the border, escort people into Mexico, escort people through buses and trains to the Rio Grande River, put wristbands on these people so they know which gang they are associated with and which type of tour they bought, and have them carry drugs across the Rio Grande. If our Border Patrol tries to stop people crossing the river, they throw little children in the Rio Grande so our Border Patrol has to go there. They eventually turn these people over to Border Patrol on the southern border, where they are turned over to nongovernmental organizations that put them in hotels. These hotels are not secure, so even if you have COVID, you are let out into the country. They hold relatives hostage in Central America and Mexico so that the people who come here have to pay money to get their entry into this country, from $3,000 to $20,000. Please do not forget what is going on at the border in the next 7 weeks.

Mr. GROTHMAN

Mr. GROTHMAN. Mr. Speaker, I noticed this morning that in the last week there were a couple more homicides in the city of my birth, Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Milwaukee right now is on pace to exceed the record number of homicides they had last year. This did not happen in a vacuum. There are some people who blame guns, but other crimes are up as well, which shows guns have nothing to do with it. The reason is that law enforcement is under attack and has been passive, not only in Milwaukee, but in Chicago, in Baltimore, in Philadelphia, and Washington. And why are they passive? Because politicians in this Chamber and politicians around the country have tried to blame the police for incarceration rather than blame the criminal. And as a result, police are scared to act, afraid to be aggressive, and we have murder rates higher than we have seen in quite a while, and we recently hit 90,000 deaths a year from illegal drug use. These additional deaths, to me, the blood is on the people who ignore the studies that show that police are not racist and continue to push the police into a more passive fashion. We must stop this cheap politicking.

Mr. GROTHMAN

Mr. GROTHMAN. Madam Speaker, I would like to talk about this bill overall, as well as potential amendments to the bill. Above all, this time around, after the massive increase of spending due to COVID, I think we ought to look as to whether this budget is frugal and whether the increases in the budget are actually necessary. I am going to address the line in the budget for international organizations, contributions to international organizations. The bill, as proposed on the floor today, is a 10 percent increase over last year. A lot of that money is going to the United Nations, a body that seems to delight in being critical of the United States and a body in which the clear majority of members operate governments in which you would not want to live there at all, human rights abuses and otherwise. In any event, I think we should go back to the last en bloc. There is an amendment in there. Rather than increase the amount to these international organizations by 10 percent, decrease the amount by 10 percent. We are putting so much pressure on the value of the dollar, so much debt on our children and grandchildren. The idea of going back, not to a draconian level, but the idea of going back to somewhere between where we were in 2019 and 2020, not a radical number, I think would be prudent. I think, in this line as well as other lines of the budget, we should be looking to hold things about even or a mild step back, not another massive 10 percent increase, which will largely fund an organization that takes delight in making fun of the United States and the freedoms that we have.

Mr. GROTHMAN

Mr. GROTHMAN. Madam Speaker, as part of this en bloc, we have two separate amendments. I will address them separately. The one amendment that was just addressed concerns DACA recipients and whether they should be hired here. In 2018, we had 830,000 Americans sworn in to be new citizens. I don't think anybody can accuse the United States of being shy about letting other people in this country. Obviously, if we make permanent the policy that any young person who is brought here automatically can work their way to be a United States citizen, we will have what we currently see at the southern border. We will have, again and again and again, parents coming here either asking for asylum or sending their children here by themselves, knowing that we are not going to enforce the immigration laws. Now, I think everybody here knows that the day will probably come where something is done with some DACA recipients, but it shouldn't be all DACA recipients. The idea of establishing right now that if you came here, you automatically are--I think the inference is you are going to become a citizen by saying that you can work in the Capitol when these jobs are highly in demand for many of our own citizens is a little ridiculous. One of my amendments removes the provision that says that people who are still in this country illegally can wind up working for the legislature. The second amendment concerns the Office of Diversity and Inclusion. I think the gentleman from Ohio kind of mischaracterized the amendment. We are not cutting anything here. We are leaving things in the same place they were in the last budget. We have spent money in the last 12, 14 months of this institution like never before. We went through trillions of dollars. That is one of the reasons why we have such high inflation, one of the reasons why young people are going to find it so difficult to buy a house compared to the older generation, one of the reasons why the cost of food is up. We cannot, as we go line by line through this budget, create a situation in which we are doubling lines in the budget. That is what we are doing here. The other things that are particularly irritating about this, if you go through the Office of Diversity and Inclusion, almost all the things they purport to do are done somewhere else in the legislative branch. They are really not adding a lot. Obviously, it is one of these groups that I think is going to train people to view themselves not as individuals but more as a group, which I don't think is helpful for America as a whole. But, again, after going so overwhelmingly in debt, we have a Legislative Branch budget that is up 13 percent. It would be interesting to ask how many Americans out there, how many of their individual salaries or compensation went up by 13 percent in the last year. But for Congress, no big deal. Legislative Branch is up 13 percent, House Office of Diversity and Inclusion doubled. On its face, preposterous. I bet if you polled the American public, I wonder if there are any lines in this budget they want doubled, but particularly in an agency that, like I said, their function can be dealt with by other groups. Madam Speaker, in any event, I encourage passage of this en bloc and the two amendments.

Mr. GROTHMAN

Mr. GROTHMAN. Madam Speaker, it is hard to believe there is anything else going on here with 3,000 people a day streaming across our southern border, but we are taking time to put together our budget for the next fiscal year. And in light of the fact that we recently cleared $28 trillion in debt, it is important to look at how frugal we are going into next year. If you look, Labor HHS, which is a significant part of the budget, is going up 36 percent; Interior and the Environment going up 19 percent; Transportation and HUD up 13 percent; individual smaller lines even more. The White House is taking this opportunity to increase its spending by 39 percent; the Vice President by 22 percent; the EPA is going up 23 percent. This is just plain fiscally out of control. Meanwhile, the only area of the budget that probably should go up, Homeland Security, which guards our border, is not going up at all. In any event, I hope the press has some time to put some of those numbers out there so the public can see that the fiscal incompetence of this House continues on.

Mr. GROTHMAN

Mr. GROTHMAN. Madam Speaker, two weeks ago, I spent additional time at the U.S. border, which I think, by a mile, is the biggest crisis this country has. It has recently been brought to my attention that the Rio Grande Valley sector, where I was at, recently had 20,000 people a week processed. They had never seen such a thing. What difference does this make? The more people come across, first of all, it probably means more illegal drugs crossing the border, which means more fentanyl, which is the reason why we have 90,000 deaths a year in this country. Since they're processing more people, it means less Border Patrol agents to guard the more rural areas of the border, which means more people coming across. Finally, we are in a situation, we found out, down there, when they turn people over with COVID to the nongovernmental entities, those entities do not have secure facilities, and it means people are flowing into this country who we already know have COVID. Please, during this appropriations season, please add more money to our Border Patrol so we can get a handle on these ridiculously high numbers.

Mr. GROTHMAN

Mr. GROTHMAN. Mr. Speaker, I will now address the Cuban crisis just south of our border. Cuba is, of course, a very progressive Marxist state. The government runs the economy with all the restrictions of freedom; that means there is no freedom of press. The State Department International Religious Freedom Report shows numerous violations of freedom of religion as believers in God are harassed. There is no freedom of movement. And now with protests, people are disappearing. How does the United States respond? There was a Free Cuba mural put up in Washington, D.C., and the mayor of our Nation's capital responded by saying that it was said in the past that Cuba has an education system we should learn from, and the mural disappeared. I beg President Biden to do what he can to restore internet service so the people in Cuba can communicate with each other. Please don't lift the embargo. And above all, provide a little bit of moral leadership and show that you are opposed to the Marxist cabal to the rest of the world.

Mr. GROTHMAN

Mr. GROTHMAN. Madam Speaker, I was delayed in a meeting. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 216.

Mr. GROTHMAN

Mr. GROTHMAN. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Madam Speaker, I would like to address the Chamber on what I believe is the biggest crisis facing America today. I spent last week down at the McAllen section of the U.S.-Mexico border, and what I saw horrified me. Late at night, from 10 to 11 o'clock, I watched people from all around the world walking on a pathway from the Rio Grande River to the Border Patrol station. We are right now at a point where I believe over 70,000 people a month are being allowed in the country. Many of these people have no ID at all, so there is no way to confirm who they are, to even see if they have a criminal record. Upon being processed through the border station, even without an ID, we buy them plane tickets for all around the country. Scandalously, at a time when we are talking about COVID again, even if they test positive, people are held in apartments or hotels and not guarded, so they turn around and are being released. At a time in which we are supposed to be more careful than ever, we have a situation in which people who are coming here illegally are allowed in the country. Furthermore, we watch as we have hit new records for the number of people who are killed in this country by illegal drug overdoses, including fentanyl. We are up to 90,000 people in the last year. I believe the reason we are hitting all-time records is because, as bad as heroin is, fentanyl is far worse. And all or virtually all of that fentanyl is coming across the southern border. Meanwhile, we cede control of our immigration policy to Mexican drug gangs. These gangs charge, depending upon where you are coming from, $3,000, $10,000, $20,000 to come across the border. They are so heartless that it is not uncommon that if Border Patrol approaches them on a boat from the Mexican side to the American side, whether it is with people or with drugs, they will throw a 3- or 4-year-old child into the Rio Grande River, knowing that our Border Patrol will fight to save that child rather than go after the people sneaking in the country or going after the drugs. This is the brutal type of people we are assisting by continuing the current policy or lack of a policy. I strongly urge the Biden administration to step up to the plate to make sure that COVID-positive people are no longer let into the country; bring back the old policy, the migrant protection protocol, when we had only 6,000 people a month rather than 70,000 people a month crossing the border; require some sort of photo ID, like every other American would have before they get on an airline. Good grief, who knows what type of criminal records these people have. Of course, we can only check criminal records in the United States. Nobody has any idea if these people have horrific criminal records in Honduras, El Salvador, Brazil, or all the other countries that people are coming here from. Madam Speaker, I strongly encourage the Biden administration to step up.