J.D. Hayworth

Mr. HAYWORTH

Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend, the gentleman from Virginia, the subcommittee chairman. I welcome the remarks of my friend from New York because, Mr. Chairman, it gives me an opportunity to clear up any misconception about this amendment. This does not withdraw United States participation from the United Nations, nor does it change our funding for peacekeeping missions, voluntary programs, and membership organizations. What we are saying, and what duly elected, constitutional officers here in the people's House will say with passage of this amendment, is that in terms of the regular framework of budgeting for the United Nations, a process that my colleagues admit is horribly flawed, we will reduce that funding by one-half and invite others in the international community to come forward and pay their fair share. My friend from Virginia has been very gracious with the time, and I thank him.

Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Chairman, do I have the right to close?

Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer an amendment to this appropriations bill today that reduces United States contributions to the United Nations regular budget by 50 percent. Mr. Chairman, the sad facts are these: Although plagued by scandal, the U.N. refuses to take reform seriously. Despite continued reports of U.N. employees taking advantage of the very people they are supposed to protect, allowing billions of dollars to be misspent in the oil-for- food relief program, twisted allegations of U.N. peacekeepers offering minors food in return for sex in the Congo, providing seats for China, Sudan and then Cuba at the Human Rights Commission, Kofi Annan refuses to consider necessary reforms to clean up the U.N. Indeed, Mr. Chairman, in as recently as today's headlines, we read of alleged connections and knowledge by the Secretary General into the dealings of the Swiss firm Cotecna in this horrible oil-for-food scandal. The United Nations' regular budget is nearly $2 billion per year. Of that amount, the U.S. regularly contributes 22 percent. The underlying bill earmarks $440 million for the next year's U.N. budget, and even after, even after a $218 million reduction in dues, the United States will be the second largest contributor to the U.N. budget and the largest contributor to all other U.N. programs, including peacekeeping missions, voluntary programs and membership organizations. Mr. Chairman, it is easier to amend the Constitution of the United States than the Charter of the United Nations, yet when we come to this floor at the outset of every Congress, we raise our right hand and express our allegiance to the Constitution of the United States. It is time to restore the proper priorities. There is no clearer message, there is no clearer way to impact public policy, than to reduce the budget, to reduce the expenditures of the American taxpayer to this international budget. I ask approval of this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I would simply point out to my friend, the distinguished subcommittee chair, I appreciate his passion, and I appreciate his pioneering work in terms of what has happened at Darfur. But this amendment was brought to this House in the previous Congress, and again we were told to wait. The fact is, as constitutional officers, it is incumbent upon us to move to stop abuses. I would point out that this amendment does not change our funding for peacekeeping missions, voluntary programs and membership organizations. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King).

Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HAYWORTH

Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Speaker, it is my sad duty to inform this House and the people of this Nation of the passing of a dedicated public servant. The vice mayor of Fountain Hills, Arizona, Kathleen Nicola, passed away last week as the result of a boating accident. A longtime Arizona resident, Kathleen Connelly Nicola moved to Lake Havasu City, Arizona, in June of 1967. After a move to Mesa in 1985, Kathleen and her family settled in Fountain Hills in 1989. Kathleen's service to the town of Fountain Hills began in 1990 when she began working for the municipal court after a brief period of volunteering her services. During her tenure as administrator of the court over the following 9 years, Kathleen's extensive duties included budget preparation and day-to-day management of that court. Kathleen's responsibilities likewise included the court's compliance with local, county, and State statutes, rules and administrative orders, in addition to statistical and financial reports; and with that involvement and background in government, Kathleen Nicola decided to run for the Fountain Hills Council in 2002, serving there with distinction, rising to the post of vice mayor prior to her tragic death last week. Kathleen earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Justice Studies from the College of Public Programs from Arizona State University. She graduated from the Arizona School of Real Estate and Business, making a career change in the summer of 2000 to become a licensed real estate salesperson. A local real estate professional, Kathleen was an active member of the Fountain Hills Chamber of Commerce and the Scottsdale Association of Realtors. Kathleen Nicola, one of those in America who understood that public service can be expressed through many avenues of citizen involvement, finally choosing to run for public office, serving as the vice mayor of the town she loved. Residents of the fifth congressional district, the town of Fountain Hills join as one to express their sympathies and condolences to the Nicola family. And, Mr. Speaker, I would hope that all Americans would remember the Nicola family in their prayers during these difficult days. The legacy of Kathleen Connelly Nicola, a woman called to service, service in her town, service in public office, service in her profession. She will be long remembered, and she is most definitely missed.

Mr. HAYWORTH

Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Goode amendment, and I do so with the utmost respect for the preceding speakers on the other side of the aisle. Because in pointing out the symptoms and the challenges of the problems we confront on our border, rather than arguing against the amendment, as is the intent of my friends from Texas, in fact they are bolstering the argument for the very reason we should support this amendment. Here is why, Mr. Chairman. National security and border security are one and the same. As my colleagues from Texas, who share a common border as I do in my home State in Arizona, as we share a common border with the Republic of Mexico, I would remind my colleagues that to our north there is a border stretching with Canada that is close to 8,000 miles, when you take a look at all the ins and outs. So it is not directed absolutely at our neighbors in the south. There is a danger to our north. This has little to do with morale or professionalism of border patrol agents. Instead, it has to do with the incredible job we ask our border patrol to do across that vast northern border and across our important southern border. It is because of the tenor of the times, in the wake of 9/11, and, Mr. Chairman, precisely because of what we heard our former colleague, Mr. Goss of Florida, now Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, say in an open session to a committee in the other body, that his greatest concern is the introduction of some sort of weapon or some hostile action taken by those crossing our porous borders. My colleagues from Texas just pointed out, in terms of those other- than-Mexicans coming across our southern border, and as the Director of the FBI confirmed to a subcommittee of this House, there are individuals coming in to this Nation through our southern border who are coming from nations that export Islamofascism and terrorism and they are adopting Hispanic-sounding surnames as their aliases. And my good friend, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Ortiz), took a direct hand in pointing out those who are involved in creating security risks along our border. He mentioned the threat of the MS-13 gangs and all that is going on. My colleagues, the Goode amendment is needed now more than ever. And I say that as one from a border State who stood in opposition to amendments of this type during my previous years in Congress. But the bottom line, Mr. Chairman, is this: yes, we have troops in the field; we have troops far from home fighting on the streets of Tikrit so we do not see a fight on the streets of Tucson; fighting on the streets of Baghdad so we do not see this on the streets of Boston. But by the same token, 1 week ago, when we discussed the challenges that we were confronting in terms of border security and national security, I would suggest that a vacuum exists, because we hear so much debate in this House about resources for first responders. Mr. Chairman, I would recommend and I would suggest that there is an interim vacuum that we should take into account. Not only are men and women in uniform on the offensive around the world in a global war on terror, but we also must deal with the ability of the Secretary of Defense in coordination with the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security to utilize our military personnel. If we had in place the adequate manpower and resources for first defenders on our borders, perhaps the first responders would not be needed. Mr. Chairman, I respect my colleagues from Texas. I understand their concerns. Indeed, there is much on this topic where we have agreement. We understand the danger we confront. But we have seen the results of force multiplication, or at least the presence of American citizens on the border in my home State. Force multiplication, and another option here is what is needed. Support the Goode amendment.

Mr. HAYWORTH

Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Speaker, on May 27, 2005 a courageous and distinguished Marine will be laid to rest in Arlington National Cemetery. Major Eddie Whitehead, a respected Vietnam veteran who proudly served his country in the United States Marine Corps for 28 years, will be laid to rest today among other great American heroes at Arlington National Cemetery. On February 25, 2005 Major Whitehead lost his battle with cancer, and all who knew and loved him will miss him, including his wife Bonnie, son Eddie Jr., daughters MitziLynn Keegan and Christian Thijm, sister Mitzi Datres, and grandchildren Derek and Casey Jene. Let us pause to remember him and thank an American hero.

Mr. HAYWORTH

Mr. HAYWORTH. Madam Chairman, I yield 15 seconds to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Norwood).

Mr. HAYWORTH. Madam Chairman, I yield myself 3\1/4\ minutes. I rise in strong opposition to the amendment offered by my colleague from Texas. As you heard in her opening remarks, sadly, this amendment is an attempt to discredit worthy, nonviolent volunteers who dedicated their time and their energy to protect our Nation's borders last month. The Minuteman Project, Madam Chairman, is simply an outgrowth of the public's frustration with the Federal Government's failure to secure our borders. Indeed, what the Minutemen did was follow a time-honored tradition of petitioning our government for legitimate redress of grievance. It is true that in terms of the political landscape, the ACLU and the Government of Mexico protested the group even before the patrol began; but the Minutemen effectively shut down a 20-mile stretch of border without a single credible report of violence committed by those citizen volunteers. With reference to the notion of a study, Madam Chairman, I would simply say this: the records are intact. I will make them a part of the record right now. Attacks on border patrol agents by alien and drug smugglers are on the rise. In the Tucson sector alone during the first 6 months of this fiscal year, there were reported 132 assaults on agents, 14 more than all of last year. That is in the first 6 months of the fiscal year. Border patrol agents in Arizona are attacked once every 2 days, 64 times in a recent 3-month period. Six border patrol agents assigned to the Tucson sector have been killed in the line of duty, including a 27-year-old agent fatally shot in June of 1998 near Nogales as he sought to arrest four men hauling marijuana into the United States. When I had occasion to visit with border patrol agents in March, they told me how snipers from the Mexican side of the border will actually shoot border patrol vehicle windshields out if the Mexican snipers deem these vehicles are parked too close to the border. In 2004, border patrol agents arrested over 650 suspected terrorists. Madam Chairman, let me repeat that. In 2004, border patrol agents arrested over 650 suspected terrorists from countries of national security interest trying to cross our southern border. They expect the number will rise this year. In January of this year, border patrol in the Tucson sector impounded 557 smuggling vehicles, almost 35,000 pounds of marijuana, and 35,704 illegal aliens. This amendment fails to address the violent attacks on our border patrol agents. It implies that citizens of the United States seeking redress and putting an end to the influx of terrorists and the illegal invasion of this country are wrong. The committees on Homeland Security and the Judiciary oppose this amendment. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the Jackson-Lee amendment. Madam Chairman, I yield 1\1/4\ minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goode).

Mr. HAYWORTH. Madam Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time to make this point to my colleagues. I am sure it is not the intent of my colleague from Texas to try and imply that citizens engaged in lawful protest are somehow attempting to inspire violent acts. I know that is not the intent of my colleague. However, that would be the perverse result if this House would support that amendment. This House would then be on record saying that the lawful rights of citizens should be abridged to accommodate illegal acts by noncitizens. That is something this House and this government and the citizens of this Nation will not countenance. Therefore, because of that, I would ask all my colleagues to join me in opposition to the Jackson-Lee amendment. Vote ``no.''

Mr. HAYWORTH

Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for this time. I rise in strong support of this conference report as the people's House at long last takes care of some unfinished business. In the closing days of the 108th Congress, some in the other body objected to commonsense provisions that deal with our national security and our border security, to wit, the notion that when you apply for a driver's license or another legal document, you should be who you say you are, and you should enjoy legal status in this country. This supplemental conference report includes the REAL ID Act, and at long last the Congress of the United States gets real and understands that border security and national security are one and the same. Pass this to help protect our borders and help protect our national security.

Mr. HAYWORTH

Mr. HAYWORTH. Madam Chairman, earlier this year I reintroduced the Residential Solar Energy Tax Credit Act, which would provide a 15 percent tax credit for the purchase of solar water heating systems and photovoltaic systems to be installed in residential settings. The maximum amount of this credit is $2,000 and the credit cannot apply to solar energy systems used to heat swimming pools. I am pleased this provision has been included in the tax title to H.R. 6, the Energy Policy Act of 2005. The solar energy industry in our Nation has been growing at a clip of 25 percent per year for the past several years, yet U.S. manufacturers export 75 percent of their products because of the higher up-front costs of solar energy systems as compared to other energy sources. Purchasing a solar energy system is like buying a car and prepaying for all the gas it would ever need. This makes consumers understandably hesitant despite the environmental and other gains associated with solar energy. National polls consistently find that over 85 percent of Americans want greater support for solar power, and solar power can play a role in our energy mix from coast to coast. It is my belief that the residential solar tax credit will help advance this important form of renewable energy. And in stark contrast to the protestations of my friends on the left, we are willing to embrace these technologies. It is proven by this solar energy tax credit. I thank the chairman for its inclusion. I urge support of the legislation.

Mr. HAYWORTH

Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Texas for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in favor of the rule, and I rise in favor of the Sessions amendment. The amendment makes certain that before an alien is released from DHS detention on his own recognizance pending an upcoming hearing, the immigration judge first certify that the alien is not a flight risk and, more importantly, that he does not pose a security risk to the United States. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the different views that we hear in the well of this House. I understand full well Dr. Franklin's admonition about the challenge confronting those who seek security and yet also wish to preserve liberty. Mr. Speaker, one of the reasons we are here on the floor visiting this issue today is, as the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Rules pointed out, while our founders believed that all men were created equal, now we have the arcanities and absurdities of certain judicial procedures that allow illegal aliens to enjoy more legal privacy in some cases than do American citizens. We need redress. I listened with great interest to my friends who came to the floor recently discovering States rights with reference to this legislation, and I believe that to be a hopeful sign. I listened with great interest to other friends who came to offer scriptural and spiritual entreaties in this debate, and I welcome that as well. But, Mr. Speaker, here is the fundamental question we confront. In the wake of 9/11, in the wake of clear and demonstrable evidence that there are those who come to this Nation with the intent of harming and killing Americans, who are bent on the destruction of our Nation and our system of government, at long last this body should take the steps necessary to preserve our security and our liberty. Border security is national security. There has been lament expressed from the other side that we are moving too quickly. Indeed, Mr. Speaker, I came to this well in a previous Congress lamenting the fact that at the behest of the other body we remove these important provisions from a piece of legislation passed at the end of the last session of Congress. Incrementalism in wartime is unacceptable. There is a clear and present danger. We must respond. Pass the rule. Pass the Sessions amendment. Pass the underlying legislation. Let us preserve and protect our Union and our way of life.

Mr. HAYWORTH

Mr. HAYWORTH. And so, Mr. Speaker, it begins, the canard of hyperbole, the delusional statements, indeed, word coming to this body that later today, in a joint session, one from the other body will lead an American-born Boxer Rebellion. The conspiracy theorists use celluloid and mockumentaries and fevered imaginings to try to mischaracterize debate and, as we understand, even this afternoon, try to dissuade numbers and facts. Mr. Speaker, the sour grapes, the sensationalism, the conspiracy theories, and the fear and smear should be laid to rest. It will be later this afternoon, and for the American people it will be through vigorous factual debate.

Mr. HAYWORTH

Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Ways and Means be discharged from further consideration of the bill (H.R. 241) to accelerate the income tax benefits for charitable cash contributions for the relief of victims of the Indian Ocean tsunami, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. HAYWORTH

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

Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Florida, especially in terms of the fact that a quick check of the weather map indicates that his district may enjoy temperatures in the 80s this weekend; and in Arizona, we are just creeping back up to 65 in the Sonoran Desert. So I appreciate the fact that he is willing to pack a sweater. Hopefully, no umbrella will be needed in the wake of the moisture. We very much needed it in the desert earlier this week and in the high country in terms of snow. But weather aside, we hope that all our friends from the class of 1994 and the 104th Congress will enjoy their time as we take a look at where we have been and where we are headed in this 109th Congress.

Mr. HAYWORTH

Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Speaker, I seek to be recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Speaker, this may be the most appropriate time to remind each and every one of us engaged in this debate that it is the hallmark of our constitutional Republic and our government to operate by the consent of the governed. And there is a corollary to that which we should likewise remember: in a free system where the people choose, it is also necessary for contestants who are unsuccessful to accept the verdict of the people. In our Republic there are majority rules, but the rights of the minority are protected. Now, also understand what has transpired this afternoon. In what should be a reaffirmation of our constitutional Republic and the Electoral College, a Member has chosen to dispute the outcome of voting in the State of Ohio. Despite that fact, speaker after speaker on the minority side, including the leader from California, has said they accept the verdict of the election. Do not misunderstand, I say to my colleagues. This is a vitally important point. The problem we confront with this debate is that it serves to plant the insidious seeds of doubt in the electoral process. All the talk of election reform, all the talk of hearings that the leader championed, all the process complaints, some that are inaccurate that have come from the other side, are points to be debated in the regular business of this House. Yes, they are important. But to disrupt the Electoral College, to say in effect, hey, we just want to shine light on this problem, is not the proper use of the people's time. And with all due respect, I question not the intent; but the net effect is this: again, it is to place doubt and to institutionalize forever the notion of grumbling and a lack of acceptance of the verdict of the people. In less elevated terms, Mr. Speaker, it is called sour grapes; and it is sad to see in this House. Mr. Speaker, I would be remiss if I did not point out that this view is not shared universally, despite the kind words for the Member who brought this from her friends on that side of the aisle. Listen to the comments from Kerry campaign spokesman David Wade: ``I'd give my right arm for Internet rumors of a stolen election to be true, but blogging doesn't make it so. We can change the future; we can't rewrite the past.'' Or Kerry spokesman Joe Lockhart on Election Day: ``We think the system has worked today. There were thousands of lawyers deployed to make sure that no one tried to take advantage or unfair advantage and, by and large, it has worked. I've seen very few reports of irregularities, and even the ones we have seen, after a little investigation, you find there is not much going on.'' And it bears repeating, even though he has spoken earlier today in Baghdad and made some comments I vociferously disagree with from a Member of the Senate going into a wartime theater, listen to the words of the nominee of your own party who lost the election, my friends on the Democratic side: ``But the outcome should be decided by voters, not a protracted legal process. I would not give up this fight if there was a chance we should prevail, but it is now clear that even when all of the provisional ballots are counted, which they will be, there won't be enough outstanding votes for us to be able to win Ohio and, therefore, we cannot win this election.'' Mr. Speaker, one of the virtues of our system is this: in America, there are never lost causes because, in America, there are never fully gained causes. That is why we have the electoral process. How sad the electoral process has been sidelined today for a publicity stunt.

Mr. HAYWORTH

Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Speaker, I rise in reluctant, but vociferous, opposition to this legislation, fully named the National Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act. Mr. Speaker, I reluctantly, but adamantly, oppose this measure because it fails to deal effectively with the second heading in the legislative title. It is beyond titles and slogans and, instead, policies where we must concentrate ourselves. Mr. Speaker, much has been made, and I have heard previous speakers speak of the families who suffered such great loss on 9/11, speak of what this Nation confronted on that fateful day. Yet, perhaps in a triumph of legislative policy and the incrementalism so often a part of the system, we are ignoring the single best provision to prevent future acts of terror, understanding that border security and national security are one and the same. Good people on both sides of the aisle, well-intentioned people rightfully say we need to restructure our national intelligence- gathering capabilities. I concur. But what we see now, Mr. Speaker, is laying a new foundation, building a new wall, but forgetting both a front door and a back door and a roof. We are leaving our doors wide open. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased and proud to be an Arizonan. I was in Nogales at our border crossing not too long ago visiting with our friends from the Border Patrol. They told me of an interesting apprehension the day before. The gentleman they said was a native of Iraq who had claimed to come to the United States in 1978 with a green card. It was interesting, though, to hear the Border Patrol personnel speak of their detainee, because curiously, the Iraqi who said he had come to the United States in 1978 with a green card was much more fluent in Spanish than he was in English. We read in accounts of the free press that there are those who come from the Middle East, adopt Hispanic surnames, and seek to infiltrate. There are some adherents to the politically correct who would ignore or diffuse or understate the nature of this threat. Mr. Speaker, I will not allow the national security of the United States to be jeopardized and undermined and placed on the funeral parlor of the politically correct. To those who say that it is incremental, it is a step in the right direction: well and good. But incrementalism in wartime when our national survival may be at stake is unacceptable. Either do it right, or do not do it. It is sad, but necessary, to reject this bill because it fails to deal with preventing terrorist attacks by understanding that border security and national security are one and the same.

Mr. HAYWORTH

Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, for yielding me the time. As an Eagle Scout, I rise in strong support of this resolution and am heartened by the bipartisan outpouring of support for the Boy Scouts of America, as mentioned earlier, a movement that was chartered federally by this very Congress early in the 20th century. While we today reiterate our support for the scouting movement, as my colleague from California, the sponsor of this resolution, noted, scouting is under attack. The American Civil Liberties Union filed a nuisance lawsuit against the Pentagon saying that somehow sponsorship of Scout troops on military bases violates the doctrine of separation of church and State. Mr. Speaker, that is a nuisance lawsuit, and I am sorry the Defense Department attorneys decided to surrender to the ACLU. Mr. Speaker, I have written Secretary Rumsfeld asking him to countermand the decision of the Pentagon lawyers. Scouting values, military values, citizenship values, a respect and reverence for our Creator is not a violation of the doctrine of separation of church and State. So I hope those who join us in support of this resolution will likewise join us to say to the Pentagon attorneys, take down the white flag of surrender, do not give up on scouting, and we remain poised to take further measures to ensure that our government institutions follow the will of the people and the sentiment of the Congress.

Mr. HAYWORTH

Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 437) to provide for adjustments to the Central Arizona Project in Arizona, to authorize the Gila River Indian Community water rights settlement, to reauthorize and amend the Southern Arizona Water Rights Settlement Act of 1982, and for other purposes.

Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on S. 437, the Senate bill under consideration.