David Price

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, on September 2, we received the sad news of the passing of W.G. ``Bill'' Hefner, the Representative for 12 terms from the Eighth District of North Carolina. He served from 1975 to 1998. Bill Hefner was a beloved and respected Member of this body, a man who never lost his sympathy for the underdog and never lost his capacity to advocate for the working people of our State and our Nation. Bill was probably best known for his impact on the quality of life of our military men and women, our service men and women, through his chairmanship of the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee. I would, at this point, like to yield to Larry Kissell who currently represents the Eighth District of North Carolina and who on Tuesday night convened a Special Order to pay tribute to this wonderful man.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I thank my colleagues for scheduling this time tonight for us to remember our friend and colleague, Bill Hefner, to honor his memory. I first got to know Bill when I came to this body in 1987. He was already a fairly senior Member. He became an important mentor to me and a valued friend and colleague. As many have said already, Bill came from a humble background. He never lost touch with working people. He had a natural empathy and understanding of people who were struggling in life, great sympathy for the underdog. He was a man of great compassion, and that compassion was not feigned. It was something that came naturally to Bill, an innate sense, I think, in Bill, of fairness and decency. There is not going to be a speaker here tonight, I promise you, that doesn't refer to Bill's sense of humor. He was the funniest man probably that ever served in this Chamber. He could cut through tense moments in these overheated debates in a way that was a marvel to behold. Sometimes, as Mr. Edwards said, he showed great courage in the way he dealt with those debates. I have a memory very similar to Chet Edwards. This one comes earlier when I had been here only a year or so. It was a debate of the so-called ``Grove City'' bill which was a proposal that unfortunately would have put an adverse interpretation on civil rights laws. And it was a bill the effect of which was being greatly exaggerated by a prominent figure of the religious right of that time. He said that if this bill was passed, churches would have to, and I'm quoting him here, to hire a practicing active homosexual drug addict with AIDS to be a teacher or youth pastor. Well, Bill Hefner was watching this go on, and like all of us, he was getting his switchboard flooded with calls coming in alarmed about this from well-meaning people who didn't know what to make of this. I wrote a book a couple of years later and remembered, looked back at this episode because it impressed me so much at the time. In my chapter on religion and politics, I quoted Bill Hefner, what he said coming to this floor and cutting through that debate, and the words I'm going to read don't do justice to the effect he had just in his commonsense way. Bill said, I find reprehensible not those thousands of people who have made the phone calls, but the people that have instigated this misinformation. If it means I lose my position in the U.S. House of Representatives if I do not cave in and base my vote on what people believe to be true but what I know not to be true, I say to my colleagues, this job is not worth that to me. I remembered that and looked it up. And it still stands for me as a memory of effective debate in this House, effective not just rhetorically but because of its being said from the heart and its being said with true conviction. Bill was a member of the Appropriations Committee, chairman of the Subcommittee on Military Construction, a champion of our servicemen and -women, of their housing and of their quality of life. An elementary school at Fort Bragg bears his name, as does the Salisbury Veterans Administration Hospital. Bill was a mentor to many of us. He gave me pep talks on more than one difficult vote. He could put everything in perspective. I valued that mentorship, that support, and that encouragement. He helped me get on the Appropriations Committee, and then he helped me figure out how to get things done once I got on the Appropriations Committee. He was a mainstay of our delegation, one of our most influential Members, yes, but also a Member who helped us all stick together, whom we all liked and respected. We enjoyed his company. And I think it's fair to say that Bill's role in our delegation has never quite been filled since he left. I remember very well the dinner that was given for Bill shortly before his retirement. The Harvesters Quartet, pretty elderly gentlemen by that time, they were gathered from all over the country, they came in and sang one more time. And Bill's friends and associates and colleagues got up one after the other and told many stories like those we heard tonight. It was one of the most enjoyable and heart-warming evenings I have ever experienced in this city or anywhere else. So I'm pleased to join tonight in honoring Bill, in recalling our friendship, our common labors with him. He served North Carolina and this Nation faithfully and well in ways that continue to inspire.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Thank you to the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee for his work on H. Res. 675, which I'm proud to rise in support of. It's a message of solidarity to the people of Indonesia. I want to first thank the leadership of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Asia-Pacific Subcommittee, in particular, for their leadership on this issue in putting this resolution forward on behalf of the House Democracy Assistance Commission. Mr. Dreier and I have worked closely with the committee leadership and staff, as well as the leadership of the Indonesia Caucus, Mr. Wexler and Mr. Burton of Indiana. A week ago last Friday, July 17, two terrorists detonated suicide bombs inside the Ritz-Carlton and Marriott Hotels in the central business district of Jakarta, killing themselves and seven others and wounding over 50. It was the first successful attack in Indonesia since 2005, and it comes at a time when the country has made substantial progress in the fight against terrorism. The attackers appeared to have been targeting a conference of Western businessmen meeting at the Marriott and citizens of over a dozen countries, including eight Americans, who were injured in these horrific attacks. The majority of the victims were Indonesian citizens going peacefully about their daily affairs. For my HDAC colleagues and me, these attacks hit pretty close to home because our commission had visited Jakarta just 2 weeks before to continue the partnership we have been forging with the Indonesia Parliament since 2006. We met with parliamentary leaders as well as with a number of newly elected members discussing their progress towards democratic reforms during this time of political transition in Indonesia. In light of this productive and mutually enriching partnership, it's fitting that a delegation from the Indonesian equivalent of our House Administration Committee is visiting the House today and tomorrow for 2 days of meetings arranged by the House Democracy Assistance Commission. Led by Chairwoman Indria Octavia Muaja, the delegation is here to meet with our Foreign Affairs Committee, as well as our House Administration Committee and chief administrative officer, to discuss how to implement and manage an effective human resources system in their parliament. Now, this may not grab any headlines, but it's this type of partnership that will help build the foundations of a stable and prosperous democracy in the years ahead. And so, Madam Speaker, we offer this resolution today to extend our condolences to our guests and all of the people of Indonesia and all of the other countries suffering casualties in these attacks, to condemn these senseless acts of terrorism in the strongest possible terms and to reaffirm our commitment to the strengthening of democratic institutions and the promotion of peace, prosperity, and tolerance in Indonesia. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chair, I am pleased to present the fiscal year 2010 Homeland Security Appropriations bill, as reported by the Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee. It is the product of extensive information gathering and analysis, with 15 hearings touching every Department of Homeland Security component. The bill provides the resources and the direction that the Department needs for the coming fiscal year. This bill also reflects our subcommittee's tradition of bipartisan cooperation initiated by its first chairman and now ranking member, Hal Rogers. I want to thank the distinguished ranking member for his advice and help on making this a better bill, and to his staff, too, for working so closely and constructively with us. We agree on most of this bill, if not every item, and I believe this is a bill that every Member in this body can get behind. In total, the bill contains $42.625 billion in discretionary appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security. This is $2.6 billion, or 6.5 percent, above the comparable fiscal year 2009 amount, and about 1 percent below the administration request, excluding Coast Guard overseas contingency operations. This level reflects our share of the $10 billion cut made in the budget resolution to the administration's overall request. Homeland security requires identification and response to all threats, whether man-made or natural. This ``all-hazards'' approach is the hallmark of our subcommittee, an approach we are happy to see President Obama and Secretary Napolitano embrace. The persistent threat of pandemic flu is an unmistakable reminder of why we must prepare for all hazards, as is the annual and predictable onslaught of natural disasters, from hurricanes and floods to wildfires and ice storms. Accordingly, this bill will enable our government to better protect the American people against all major threats. Appropriately for the start of hurricane season, the bill maintains a robust $844 million for FEMA management and administration, and $2 billion for disaster relief. In addition, the bill and report specifically place FEMA at the forefront of disaster response management, thereby avoiding confusion when working with our State and local partners. State and local emergency managers and first responders are equal partners in disaster preparedness and response, and I am pleased that the administration's budget request recognizes this important partnership. This bill strengthens our commitment to our State and local partners by providing $3.96 billion for grant and training programs, including: $330 million for Emergency Management Performance Grants, our one true all-hazards grant program; $950 million for State homeland security grants; $887 million for the Urban Area Security Initiative, which targets the highest risks of terrorism; and $800 million for firefighter assistance grants. Within that $800 million for firefighter assistance grants, $420 million is for SAFER staffing grants, or personnel grants, and $380 million is for basic equipment and training grants. The additional funding for SAFER is part of a targeted and temporary effort to stem the tide of layoffs and ensure our communities are protected by an adequate number of firefighters. In addition to the increased funding, the supplemental appropriations bill just passed allows the waiver of certain restrictions and broadens the use of SAFER to allow the grants to be used for the hiring, rehiring and retention of firefighters for fiscal years 2009 and 2010. Madam Chairman, one could make an argument for increasing nearly any account in this bill; but since we can't spend the whole Federal Treasury on homeland security, we must base our priorities on risk. The subcommittee has done this with respect to the identification and removal of illegal aliens who have committed crimes; in other words, illegal aliens who have proven their capacity to do harm in our communities. The bill continues the tradition of recent bills by targeting $1.5 billion of Immigration and Customs Enforcement appropriations for this priority, an effort that the President and Secretary Napolitano wholeheartedly support. Part of this funding furthers development of the Secure Communities program, which offers a productive approach for Federal immigration agents to work closely with State and local law enforcement while distinguishing the traditional Federal role of enforcing immigration law from the local role of prosecuting criminal violations. We have heard from many law enforcement and community groups about the importance of keeping a bright line between immigration enforcement and local community policing, and the Secure Communities program does just that. Taking on the international drug cartels along our southwest border is another major priority we support in this bill. The bill enhances funding for CBP and ICE to combat illegal narcotics smuggling from Mexico and the cartels' trafficking in weapons and bulk currency. The bill supports a realistic and strategic approach to southwest border infrastructure and maintains a historically robust Border Patrol force. Other specific priorities we have funded included: $800 million for explosive detection systems at airports and $122.8 million for air cargo security to meet the 100 percent screening requirement for air cargo in the hold of passenger planes by August of 2010; $804 million to continue developing systems to screen inbound land- and sea-based cargo for weapons or nuclear materials, which includes $162 million to strengthen overseas operations to monitor and target cargo; $241.5 million for the Coast Guard to support overseas contingencies in the Persian Gulf and off the coast of Somalia; $382 million for cybersecurity, to help protect vulnerable computer infrastructure from the escalating sophistication and intensity of cyberattacks; and $10 million above the administration's request to expand the Alternatives to Detention program nationwide. Alternatives to Detention is a cost- effective alternative for low-risk individuals such as asylum seekers, families, and the elderly. The bill includes several policy items requested by the administration. It clarifies fee authorities for temporary protected status petitions and visa fraud investigations; it extends the E-Verify program for 2 years; and it continues a longstanding provision related to imported prescription drugs. As it did last year, this bill contains Member-requested and Presidential earmarks. Each Member's project has been vetted by DHS and deemed eligible, if part of a grant program, or consistent with the Department's mission otherwise. We did have to reduce earmarks by 5 percent below last year's level. This is a good bill, one I hope every Member will support. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute, to be followed by 4 minutes for a colloquy. But before we go any further in this debate today, I do want to pay tribute to our staff by name. These staff members have worked day and night for weeks now up to the committee markup, and now up to this floor consideration. Our chief clerk, Stephanie Gupta, Shalanda Young, Jeff Ashford, Jim Holm, Will Painter, Adam Wilson, Matt Behnke; and from my staff, Paul Cox, who spends full time on Homeland Security matters. On the minority side, the able minority clerk, Ben Nicholson, as well as Allison Dieters. We need to again and again thank these staff members, these true professionals, for the way they back up our work. And now, Madam Chairman, I would like to yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis) for purposes of a colloquy.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I want to thank Representative Polis and Representative Roybal-Allard, a fine, hardworking member of our subcommittee, for the work they've done on this issue, for highlighting the financial cost and the human impact of ICE'S current detention policy. I, too, believe we can do better. While the average cost of detention is about $100 per person per day, alternative programs such as telephone reporting, unannounced home visits, local office reporting, and electronic monitoring cost, on average, less than $20 per person per day and are very successful. According to a recent ICE analysis of the program, the Intensive Supervision Appearance Program currently has a 99 percent total appearance rate for all immigration hearings, a 95 percent appearance rate at final removal hearings, and a 91 percent compliance rate with removal orders. This program has been successful at pilot sites in Colorado, California, Maryland, Kansas, Florida and Pennsylvania; so, therefore, I sought funding to expand it. Our bill increases the budget for alternatives to detention programs by 16 percent above the President's request.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to another fine member of our subcommittee, Mrs. Lowey.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I thank the gentleman, and I certainly recognize the important role that canine teams play in screening perishable items like fruits and vegetables. It's my intention that TSA use a portion of these funds to train additional canine teams for air- cargo screening.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chairman, I yield 3 minutes for the purpose of a colloquy to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hare).

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Well, I thank the gentleman from Illinois for recognizing this important issue. The FEMA policy on levee assistance was intended to clarify the roles and responsibilities of Federal agencies in providing critical flood recovery work. I understand that the gentleman and the other members of the Illinois delegation have concerns that the policy may not be accurate in its accounting of Federal responsibility and may have the unintended consequence of leaving gaps in assistance for local communities in levee districts. As the gentleman mentioned, FEMA and the Army Corps are reevaluating the policy to ensure there are no gaps in disaster assistance. I would like to stress this is only a policy, not a rule, so FEMA could easily make adjustments to this document. If changes are necessary, FEMA should do so in consultation with the Army Corps to ensure accurateness. This issue is also being evaluated with the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, the authorizing committee of jurisdiction. I will monitor the issue as our bill progresses. I will work with the gentleman, the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, and the Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee as we go forward.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I welcome a colloquy with my distinguished colleague.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I thank the gentleman from New Jersey for highlighting this issue. I agree that the flood-map program is an instrumental tool in reducing the loss of life and property from floods. This subcommittee will work with the gentleman to review the recent contract solicitation. I am committed to ensuring that DHS invests acquisition dollars in projects that are well planned, competitively awarded, well managed and closely overseen.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chairman, I would like to recognize our colleague, Mr. Cuellar, for 2 minutes.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chairman, I would like to yield 2 minutes to one of our outstanding new Members from Florida, Ms. Kosmas.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Arizona (Mrs. Kirkpatrick).

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I am pleased to enter into a colloquy with my distinguished colleague from Arizona.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I appreciate the gentlewoman's strong commitment to securing our Nation's borders and her hard work on this issue as a Member from a border State and a member of the authorizing committee on Homeland Security. I assure her I will work with her to provide information about how it meets requests for air support on the border, as well as any program changes or resources required to optimize CBP Air and Marine effectiveness at the border.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chairman, I would like to yield 2 minutes to a distinguished subcommittee member from the authorizing committee, our colleague, the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to recommit.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, let me say at the outset that I understand Members will make their own decision about this amendment, and I'm not going to presume to recommend a ``yes'' or ``no'' vote. But I am going to say a few things which need to be said and give a few facts about the impact of this motion and about this program, which I hope will help Members make this decision. It is ironic, given the amount of discussion we've heard tonight about how harmful the deficit is, to suddenly be told that a program that's already growing at 12 percent a year, well above inflation, needs to be increased. Let me just remind Members of what the figures look like. This E- Verify program was funded in the '08 fiscal year at $60 million. It's funded this year at $100 million. It will be funded next year, according to our bill, at $112 million. Yet as of the end of April, the program had not obligated 70 percent of its 2009 budget, even though the fiscal year was more than half over. A third of the funds from the last year of the Bush administration also remain unobligated. So this doesn't look like a situation where throwing money at the program will solve its problems since the program obviously cannot spend the funds it currently has bankrolled. Now it is true that the E-Verify system has problems, particularly with falsely telling an unacceptable number of U.S. citizens that they cannot work. We provide ample money in this bill to work on those problems. However, the 2010 budget funds the entire $112 million request for the E-Verify system. It also, by the way, extends the program's authorization by 2 years. The additional funding already provided in the bill will allow the DHS managers of E-Verify to improve oversight and auditing of the program to address technical difficulties that hamper its success. There is absolutely no indication that taking this $112 million budget figure to $162 million would accomplish anything except decimating the top ranks of DHS by way of this costly offset. With the amendments that have been adopted here today, including this one, we would have cut $120 million below the administration's request for the Office of the Undersecretary for Management. A cut like this would fall hardest on important initiatives, which this House has backed in a bipartisan fashion: to improve departmental security, to train workers to meet the department's acquisition needs, to tighten oversight of DHS's major procurements, and to ensure classified programs aren't wasting taxpayer dollars or accidentally leaking classified information through the procurement process. It is a massive and devastating cut, not a free ride, not in the least. Members can make their own decision. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, pursuant to the instructions of the House in the motion to recommit, I report the bill, H.R. 2892, back to the House with an amendment.