Hal Rogers

Mr. ROGERS

Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Illinois for expressing that concern. The funding level of Radio Free Asia is, indeed, a reflection of the tight budgetary circumstances facing my subcommittee, and we will endeavor to fund RFA at a level sufficient to maintain current programming. Amendment Offered By Mr. Wynn

Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Porter) for a colloquy.

Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I am opposed to this amendment. The Justice Department has supported this proceeding as a necessary tool to fight terrorism. They oppose the amendment, as does the gentleman from Texas (Chairman Smith) of the Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims, as does the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss), the chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Crime. We all urge a no vote on the amendment.

Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman for raising this important issue. The committee recognizes the importance of collecting this data, and will work with the gentleman to raise this issue in conference. I will also be happy to join with the gentleman and the ranking member in a letter to the Attorney General on this issue, and I look forward to working with the gentleman on it.

Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis).

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

Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition and would reserve my time.

Mr. ROGERS

Mr. ROGERS. Time will tell, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. ROGERS. There very well may be.

Mr. ROGERS. The intent is that we will roll the votes until concluded and then take all of the votes at the same time.

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

Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Speaker, we are nearing the end of this bill, and we have had good progress so far. We are on the very last title, as my colleagues know, and there are only 9 amendments remaining, and in the interests of attempting to expeditiously move the bill and to finish the bill at an early hour this evening, I wish to propose a unanimous consent request: That during the further consideration of H.R. 2670 in the Committee of the Whole, no amendment shall be in order except for pro forma amendments offered by the chairman and ranking member and the following amendments which may be offered only by the Member designated, shall be considered as read, if printed, shall not be subject to amendment or to a demand for a division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole, and shall be debatable for 10 minutes, equally divided and controlled by the proponent and a Member opposed thereto: An amendment by Mr. Kucinich numbered 1;. An amendment by Mr. Campbell numbered 5; An amendment by Mr. Crowley numbered 7; An amendment by Mr. Tauzin and Mr. Dingell regarding FCC regulations; An amendment by Mr. Wynn increasing EEOC, with a decrease in the State Department funds; An amendment by Mr. Hayworth regarding U.N. World Heritage Sites; An amendment by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas regarding hate crimes; An amendment by Mr. Davis of Illinois regarding law enforcement grants; and An amendment by Mr. Dingell regarding criminal records upgrade.

Mr. ROGERS

Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I move the Committee do now rise.

Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that debate on this amendment and all amendments thereto close in 16 minutes and that the time be equally divided between the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham).

Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the gentleman's amendment. The classifications of inmates should match the classifications of the facilities, especially in the case of maximum security inmates who need the heightened security features to protect the general public, the prison employees, and other inmates. I believe that this rule is followed in the Federal prison system, but for the last 2 years we have heard testimony that certain D.C. inmates, being transferred to alternative facilities while waiting transfer to more permanent facilities, were incorrectly transferred to facilities with a lower classification. This meant that inmates that the Federal system would classify as maximum or high security were being placed in medium-security facilities. As a result, several incidents occurred, including the death of several inmates and the escape of several others into the community. Let me make this clear. The director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons has testified that classifications are important and that facilities should provide the necessary level of security for its inmates. So I would urge our colleagues to support the amendment of the gentleman, and I thank him for offering it.

Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I would point out to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant) that the law says the Secretary of State shall, not may, but shall deny visas to other people from that country until they accept their criminal aliens back.

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

Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me, and I rise in support of this amendment. I understand that the INS is holding over 3,300 cases of aliens with deportation orders who are awaiting return to their home countries but for whom their home countries will not provide the necessary travel documents to allow their return. Of the 3,300 cases, most of them are from only four countries. Over half, obviously, are from Cuba, 1,800; Vietnam, 674; Cambodia, 30; and Laos, 35. Of the remaining cases, the majority of them are more than 6 months old and come from 102 different countries. So the four countries are the big numbers here. In some instances, the home country will not accept the person because they do not want ``only criminals'' back, or they will simply refuse to recognize an individual once they have established residence in the U.S. Others will claim paperwork delays are long because of recordkeeping problems. In an effort to remedy the problem, the 1996 Immigration Act contained a provision which stated that upon being notified by the Attorney General that the government of a foreign country refuses to take back its nationals, the Secretary of State shall order consular officers in that country to stop issuing immigrant and nonimmigrant visas to nationals of that country until the Attorney General notifies her that the country has accepted their nationals. Even though the INS has stated that there are problems returning persons to some countries, we are told the Secretary of State has never ordered the suspension of issuance of visas for this purpose. The State Department claims that neither INS or the Attorney General have ever formally notified them of problems, although the State Department admits that they have been contacted by INS about their troubles in returning some persons. I think it is time, Mr. Chairman, that the Secretary gets serious in assisting the Attorney General in returning these criminal and illegal aliens. We are using valuable and scarce and declining detention spaces, bed spaces, on persons for whom deportation has already been ordered and the country refuses to receive them. So I urge our colleagues to support the gentleman's amendment. It is well thought out, and it constitutes a real problem.

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

Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I thank the gentleman for being the author of this language that was inserted into this bill. Mr. Chairman, this is I think the sixth of these appropriations bills that this exact same language has been included in. The House has passed five previous bills this year, appropriations bills, with this same language, and it is in this bill, and I commend the gentleman for his efforts, because he has been the driving force behind our efforts. This language was accepted I think unanimously in the full committee. I do not think anyone objected to it. I would certainly oppose the amendment to strike it out, and commend the gentleman for putting the language in. I urge a ``no'' vote on the amendment.

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

Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder of title IV be considered as read, printed in the Record and open to amendment at any point.

Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I am aware of the corporation and the gentleman's efforts on the committee on small business to aid veterans through this program. However, because we were uncertain of the final form of the authorization, we did refrain from providing funding. It is my understanding that the bill is not being significantly changed. Therefore, I would be happy to work with the chairman of the Subcommittee on Small Business to see what might be accomplished in the conference.

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

Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder of title IV be considered as read, printed in the Record and open to amendment at any point.