Darrell Issa

Mr. ISSA

Mr. ISSA. Madam Speaker, on Thursday, September 18, 2008, I was absent from the House. Had I been present I would have voted: On rollcall No. 610, ``nay''--H.R. 3036--To Amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 regarding environmental education, and for other purposes. On rollcall No. 611, ``nay''--H.R. 3036--Providing for consideration of H.R. 3036, to amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 regarding environmental education, and for other purposes. On rollcall No. 613, ``yes''--H.R. 3036--On Motion to Recommit with Instructions of the No Child Left Inside Act of 2008. On rollcall No. 614, ``nay''--H.R. 3036--On Passage of the No Child Left Inside Act of 2008. On rollcall No. 615, ``nay''--H.R. 6460--On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as Amended.

Mr. ISSA

Mr. ISSA. Madam Speaker, I am pleased that the House of Representatives has voted to hold the District of Columbia accountable for violating the civil rights of D.C. residents for decades. Making the District adhere to the Constitution now is better than waiting 180 days. Once the District comes into compliance with the Supreme Court decision, D.C. residents will finally be able to defend themselves against armed criminals. The District's anti-gun law created a bastion for crime. Our action here today puts D.C. residents first and criminals second.

Mr. ISSA

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, the American people know who the Republicans are. We are the party that for decades the Democrats, backed by the radical left, have accused of wanting to do nuclear power. We are the party that for decades the environmental movement has fought because we wanted to drill for oil and natural gas in America. Mr. Speaker, we are the party that has this energy bill that is not being considered, while your party, headed by Nick Rahall, Gene Green, George Miller, and John Dingell, is claiming to have a bipartisan bill that is yours which does nothing. Mr. Speaker, there is no Republican in your bipartisan. That is a new definition even for this Democrat Congress. Mr. Speaker, back in 1998 I called for our California coast to be opened for exploration so we would have a strategic reserve we could tap in time of need. Guess what, Barbara Boxer and the radical left attacked me. I lost that election. I haven't changed my position since then; I never will. America has to have its own resources. We are the party that you know has wanted to do that, and you are the party that has been blocking it.

Mr. ISSA

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, if I might inquire of the gentleman, does he have any additional speakers?

Mr. ISSA. Then I would close briefly by supporting this bipartisan legislation, recognizing the life of Isaac Hayes. Additionally mentioning that Chairman Conyers and Ranking Member Smith support this and support recognizing this inspirational man, his inspirational life, and his fine music and work he did well into the last days of his life. I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, it's my great honor to introduce the author of this piece of legislation, someone who understands the importance of Isaac Hayes to Tennessee and to the music world, Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn. I yield her 5 minutes.

Mr. ISSA

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I join with my colleague in urging support for this legislation. The Supreme Court is an independent branch of government needing to have the exact same level and should, to be honest, without any need for extension should, on a permanent basis, have a recognized ability to protect itself. We view ourselves as independent, and we have the Capitol Police. Certainly the executive branch views itself as independent and has both the Secret Service and, of course, the Army, the Navy, and the Marines, and so on. So I certainly believe that this is important for us to do today to extend the authority of the United States Supreme Court Police. But I would happily work with my colleague on the other side of the aisle to recognize that in fact this is a permanent need, and although we would have to fund it on an annual basis as we do the Secret Service, the Army, the Navy, the Marines, and so on, that we should never let the Supreme Court have any doubt but that its independence, its autonomy, its ability to do its constitutional duty without any question, but that they and those who they need to protect along with them would be protected, we should do that through a funding mechanism and never again need to do what we're doing here today. Having said that, this is a body that takes what it gets and does what it can with what it gets. Today we're considering an extension. I move with my colleague on the other side to do that, and I urge all of my colleagues to pass this. I believe this is going to be passed unanimously today. But long before 2013, we should, in fact, make this a permanent authorization. I reserve the balance of my time.

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

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

Mr. ISSA

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I join with my colleague on a bipartisan basis to recognize that in the 100 years since President Theodore Roosevelt created the FBI out of basically an assemblage of Secret Service agents and detectives, what we have done is we have grown 1,000-fold in the number of agents. Clearly today with 30,000 employees, you ask how large has the task of the FBI grown. It has grown 1,000-fold. Whether in fact it was taking on public corruption throughout this last 100 years or taking on racketeering, white collar crime, taking on the rubble of the Oklahoma City bombing and finding out who the true perpetrators were and bringing them to justice, or going after wrongdoing by the most hidden and most influential of corporate America, the FBI has spread out to do its job and do it well. The Bureau, in fact, has taken the next step since September 11 when its primary task became protecting us from another terrorist attack like the one we experienced in New York, in Washington, and Pennsylvania. Those attacks made it very clear that this elite agency had to do more. Today more than ever the FBI agents who are spread throughout the world in every embassy and in locations not even known to this body, they deal with counterterrorism in a way that no other agency can. Working hand-in-hand with overseas entities who have the charge for that, they make it their business to ensure that that foreign terrorism doesn't become an American tragedy. No other group is so prepared to recognize the needs of America and the civil rights of America. The FBI has been a critical tool for President after President to enforce our civil rights laws often against the powerful, even against governors and other elected officials who chose not to recognize the importance of the U.S. Constitution. The FBI has never been a partisan organization and has, in fact, served each and every administration in a way that we today commemorate and appreciate so much. Once again, Mr. Speaker, for the first 90-plus years, the FBI was important. After September 11, 2001, the FBI's expanded role is vital. With that, I urge the passage of this bill. I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. ISSA

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve.

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, this is drawing to a close. I think that so much has been said, not nearly enough. I appreciate my colleagues on the other side of the aisle who have done such a good job of making this a bipartisan piece of legislation. Additionally, I would like to echo the last speaker because the gentleman from Pennsylvania, rightfully so, reminded us that the men and women in our Armed Forces, in which he served and in which I served, know the rules; they know the rules that we operate under, and we know the penalty if we break those rules. We know that if our country were to, in fact, torture somebody, we would both punish those who did it and compensate those who were treated in any inconsistent way with the rule of law. We only ask that the post-Saddam Iraq, if they're paying compensation and apologizing to others, they do the same to the men who suffered at their hands. So I think that for all the men and women serving in the Armed Forces today and those who have served in the past, this Congress, on a bipartisan basis, is taking a giant step toward saying we will hold others accountable as we have always held our own accountable. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this piece of legislation. I was not aware of it in its earliest authorship. I became aware of it, in addition to the issue which I was aware of, only when it began to move toward our committee. As I looked at both the legislation and those affected, who had worked so valiantly for 17 years to try to bring justice to an unjust occurrence in the history of Iraq, I discovered that we had a large group of men and women who had been used as human shields, a relatively small group of people who had been tortured at Saddam's hands, Americans. But what I also discovered was that these people had no other way to focus the injustice of what had happened to them than by seeking a remedy in the courts, and that had been denied them for so long. Now they have that remedy from the courts, and they're being denied the opportunity to avail themselves of it. Mr. Speaker, if this were just about money, I wouldn't be standing here. This is not. This is about a much larger cause. Throughout our history, we have endeavored to compensate our men and women when we send them to war. We've endeavored to compensate them when they're prisoners of war, but we will never be able to compensate them for the torture that they've received at the hands of barbarians. The very barbarian who ordered this misconduct, Saddam Hussein, has been executed by the new government of Iraq. The new government of Iraq every day is seeking to reenter the world of justice and civilized nations. They're doing so in a myriad of ways, including settling the wrongful acts of the Saddam regime. This is no different. The amendments that I asked for, and on a bipartisan way were granted, in the Judiciary Committee sought to make it clear America wants no compensation from the new Iraq government unless it is consistent with other compensation for similar acts of the Saddam Hussein regime. As Mr. Scott has already said, the administration of Iraq is making those efforts today, and I know they will negotiate in good faith with the victims of torture if, in fact, they have standing to do so. That's why we're working on a bipartisan basis to grant the President the ability, if there are not similar settlements, to withhold this capability until or unless there are. I don't want this to be about every past war, but it wouldn't be fair to ask for this if we hadn't previously seen Libya make settlements finally but only after the State Department had withdrawn their objections. And to most people here on the House floor, World War II is but a memory or a piece of history they've read about. The men and women who were taken at Bataan and other places were tortured. Most of them died. Then, too, we felt that we shouldn't burden the new Japanese Government with the sins of the past government. I think that's a bad precedent. I believe that the making whole of people for whom you have done more than just conduct war is, in fact, the responsibility on an ongoing basis of a government if they have the ability and certainly if they grant similar compensation to people from other countries or, in the case of Japan, Libya and post-Saddam Iraq, if they grant money damages to companies who often lost nothing but money. So, Mr. Speaker, I'm going to support this legislation wholeheartedly. I know my Republican colleagues will. I note that this is, in fact, a good message to the administration to facilitate the settlement rather than to stand aside on it. Mr. Speaker, many members of our armed forces faced horrible abuse and torture at the hands of Iraq's former dictator, Saddam Hussein, during the first Gulf War. We owe those members of the armed forces not only our sympathy, but our deepest thanks for enduring immense pain and suffering for a larger cause that helped keep all of us safe here at home. We also owe those members of the armed forces justice. And that's why we're here today to pass H.R. 5167, the Justice for Victims of Torture and Terrorism Act. In the closing hours before the most recent House recess, I was very pleased to see the House, and the Senate, send legislation to the President that statutorily approved an agreement that was reached between the State Department and Libya regarding the compensation of Americans injured by Libyan-sponsored terrorism. That legislation was passed by both bodies under unanimous consent. It not only approved the negotiated agreement, which provides for hundreds of millions of dollars in compensation, but it also protected the agreement from being undone by lawyers and judges who would have otherwise interfered with its implementation. The agreement with Libya shows that State-to-State negotiations for the compensation of victims of terrorism can work. It is a far more effective means of compensating victims than lawsuits, as domestic court judgments are always difficult to enforce, and foreign entities have many ways of moving their funds offshore to avoid collection. Negotiations worked to provide fair compensation for the victims of Libya, and they can work to provide fair compensation to the victims of the torture and terrorism perpetrated by Saddam Hussein's former regime. I was very pleased to have been able to craft a bill with Chairman Conyers that not only facilitates, but encourages, State-to-State negotiations with the new democracy in Iraq that is the surest means of providing ultimate compensation for deserving victims. An amendment I offered at committee with Chairman Conyers, and which is now part of this bill, provides that the negotiations process will be allowed to continue as long as ``the President has certified to the Congress . . . that . . . negotiations are ongoing with the Government of Iraq to settle the claims in the [covered] cases . . . and the President believes that those negotiations are being conducted in good faith and could lead to a satisfactory settlement of those claims . . .'' Under this provision, the President must, on a regular basis, provide Congress with a status report attesting to the continuing good faith negotiations between the parties, and to the prospect that those negotiations could lead to a satisfactory settlement. That provision is necessary to help balance several worthy goals. One of those goals is the maintaining of a stable, free, and democratic Iraq that will help ensure horrors the likes of which were seen under Saddam Hussein will not be seen again. To that end, earlier in this Congress, Congress passed H.R. 4986, which authorized the President to waive lawsuits against the new democracy in Iraq if the President determined that the waiver is in the national security interest of the United States; that the waiver will promote the reconstruction of, the consolidation of democracy in, and the relations of the United States with, Iraq; and that Iraq continues to be a reliable ally of the United States and partner in combating acts of international terrorism. On the day the President signed that provision into law, he signed a waiver and issued a statement justifying the exercise of the waiver authority. But H.R. 4986 also included a Sense of Congress that provides as follows: ``[T]he President, acting through the Secretary of State, should work with the Government of Iraq on a state-to-state basis to ensure compensation for any meritorious claims based on terrorist acts committed by the Saddam Hussein regime against individuals who were United States nationals or members of the United States Armed Forces at the time of those terrorist acts and whose claims cannot be addressed in courts in the United States due to the exercise of the waiver authority.'' It is now time to provide the statutory requirements necessary to implement that Sense of Congress. We do that here today by passing H.R. 5167, which gives our policy of encouraging good faith negotiations to provide fair and tangible compensation to victims of torture the force of statutory law. I urge all my colleagues to support it. Mr. Speaker, I would reserve the balance of my time while again urging support for the bill.

Mr. ISSA

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

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I join with my colleague in strong support of H.R. 5938, the Former Vice President Protection Act of 2008. As my colleague said so rightfully, it is appropriate that we grant to former Vice Presidents, their spouses and children a period of time in transition of protection by the Secret Service. For the past 30 years, it has been a common practice for former Vice Presidents to receive protections on a temporary basis, via joint resolution of Congress. This act seeks to make that, appropriately, permanent, and I join with my colleague. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I say this in a bipartisan way, that in fact this body, and I know we are not allowed to talk about the other body, the Senate, and so I will only talk in terms of this bill. Mr. Speaker, this bill came back with a very good piece of legislation attached to a very good piece of legislation; but it came back based on a fundamental problem between the two bodies, and I thought it appropriate to speak on it. There is no germaneness to the second half of this bill. This is simply the Senate's ability under their rules to take something that is not germane and attach it. I wouldn't have a problem with that except under our rules, Mr. Speaker, even if we are in fact doing an immigration bill in committee, as we were last week, even if that immigration bill deals with the allocation of who gets to come into this country temporarily and permanently, if the bill only deals with one sub, sub, sub-portion of a statute, that is all we are allowed to consider. That is wrong, Mr. Speaker. And so I address you on behalf of the inequity between something completely unrelated being attached to a bill and voted out of this body. Both of these pieces of legislation are bipartisan. But if we cannot in fact even consider like information if it is ever so slightly outside of the definition of germaneness, and then we have to accept whole pieces of legislation never voted on because they were attached by the Senate, this body needs fundamental reform as to what our rules of germaneness are. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica).

Mr. ISSA

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

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2352, the School Safety Enhancement Act of 2008. Each day roughly 160,000 children miss school because they are afraid of violent incident: 100,000 children take a weapon to school, often a gun, more often a knife; 14,000 young people are attacked on school property each year; 6,250 teachers are threatened each day; and 260 teachers are assaulted. This has to stop. Normally, the Federal Government doesn't have a role in the day-to- day activities of public schools. In this case, when, in fact, a future workforce is endangered, and the widespread use of these kinds of techniques is often done by gangs and other organized crime links that, in fact, we are fighting on another front. So, Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this because we cannot put all of our money into fighting gangs on the street. We have to do something to secure schools. We have to make sure that gang membership is not necessary just to go to class. Mr. Speaker, this is a bipartisan bill. This is a bill that, in fact, was first introduced by, many of the provisions were first introduced by Republicans. It is one of those bills that has transcended the change in the administration, change in leadership of the House. And I hope that we will continue to have this kind of work, finding smarter ways, better ways to stem crime on the street, including stemming crime in the classroom. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I yield back my time.

Mr. ISSA

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

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I too rise in support of this important piece of legislation and am pleased that a cosponsor of this bill, someone who has contributed meaningfully to the bill and to its amendments, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis) is with us, and I yield to him such time as he may consume.

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, this is a good piece of legislation hammered out on a bipartisan basis. I urge the passage of this bill. I know that the 11 States that already have a Silver Alert would greatly appreciate knowing that if someone passes from their State to an adjoining State, that that protection they provide to their citizens would be provided to their citizens in another State. With that, I yield back the balance of my time and urge support.