Ed Royce

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlelady for yielding; and I just wanted to say I thank her and Mr. Burton for their amendment. I think it is very important that the United States be engaged on the subcontinent, and I think the gentlewoman from Texas and the gentleman from Indiana should be commended for their good work on this amendment. We are prepared to accept that amendment.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, last week, the Subcommittee on International Terrorism that I chair held a hearing on Venezuela's link to terrorism. On May 15, the State Department designated Venezuela as not cooperating fully with U.S. anti-terrorism efforts. Mr. Speaker, from what we heard from the Department officials, it is not that Venezuela is not cooperating fully; it is that Venezuela is not cooperating at all. Disconcerting was the testimony we heard from the State Department that Venezuelan passports can be forged with child-like ease, and that the U.S. is detaining at our borders an increasing number of third- country aliens carrying false Venezuelan documents. According to a 2003 U.S. News report, thousands of Venezuelan identity documents are being distributed to foreigners from Middle Eastern nations, including Syria, Pakistan, Egypt and Lebanon. We know that travel documents are as important as weapons for terrorists. Mr. Speaker, post-9/11, it is reckless not to view our immigration policy as national security policy.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this U.S.-Oman Free Trade Agreement. As mentioned, I chair the Subcommittee on International Terrorism and Nonproliferation of the International Relations Committee. There are several reasons to support this agreement. My comments will be focused on viewing this agreement as a means to advance our struggle against terrorism. Our country is facing deep challenges, deeper than most Americans probably realize. We are in a deadly serious struggle against Islamist terrorism and against its state sponsors. And in this struggle we need all of the friends that we can get. And Oman has been a friend. The fact is that Oman has been helpful in advancing our strategic interests in the Persian Gulf region. We store military equipment there. Oman has been helpful in combating terrorism. It has checked the flow of money to terrorist organizations, something we need to do more on and with in terms of other Gulf States. Other major countries use trade to advance their strategic interests. I am going to explain for a minute that China is doing this, and China is certainly doing it also all over Africa. I have been in 22 countries in Africa, and I have watched China do this from North Africa to subSaharan Africa. Fortunately, there we are competing in trade through AGOA, competing for influence. You know elsewhere around the globe, China is competing for access to oil and other strategic resources. They are gaining political friends. The difference is that China undermines transparency and the rule of law in many countries. But the U.S.-Oman agreement strengthens transparency and the rule of law, which are longstanding American values. This agreement is good economics. In that sense it is like the African Growth and Opportunity Act. This agreement will increase access to the Oman market for American exporters of agricultural products, health care and engineering services, among others, but it is good strategy too. The 9/11 Commission recommended that we pursue this type of policy. It is true that the agreement's economic significance is not that large. U.S. trade with Oman will remain modest. But its rejection would set back an important strategic relationship, one that this and previous administrations have done a very good job advancing. Let's not go that route. I ask my colleagues to support this agreement.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Leach for yielding. Mr. Speaker, as chairman of the Subcommittee on International Terrorism and Nonproliferation, I rise in support of this resolution and to strongly condemn the terrorist attack that took place last week in Mumbai, India. Last week, eight bombs ripped through crowded commuter trains headed for Mumbai in a well-coordinated terrorist attack which claimed as many as 200 lives and injured hundreds more. Mumbai is, of course, India's commercial capital, teeming with people contributing to India's growing economy. Yesterday, life across that city of over 12 million halted for 2 minutes, 2 minutes of silence to remember those killed a week ago. The style of the attacks and the targeting of mass transportation share the tactics of al Qaeda and Kashmiri militants, and echo the attacks of London, 7/7, and Madrid, 3/11. The attack in Mumbai took place not long after a series of grenade attacks took eight lives in Kashmir. Tests this week confirmed that the Mumbai bombers used the powerful military explosive, RDX, a weapon that has been favored by the Pakistani-led LeT. LeT has had links to al Qaeda, with a senior al Qaeda leader, Abu Zubaydah, being captured at a LeT safe house in 2002 in Faisalabad, Pakistan. Mr. Speaker, while we commiserate with India, we must also view these attacks as a reminder that terrorism is indeed a global struggle. It is often said that India and America have a natural bond as two of the largest democracies. Today we share a bond of a common enemy: what the 9/11 Commission identified as Islamist terrorism. Today our thoughts are with the people of India, and I am confident that the aftermath of these attacks and in that aftermath, we will see all the resilience that is embodied in the Indian people.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Madam Speaker, as the chairman of the Subcommittee on International Terrorism and Nonproliferation, I rise in support of this vital resolution in support of democratic Israel, who is facing terrorist attacks on two fronts, from Hamas and Hezbollah. It is important to have a clear focus on the threat posed by Hezbollah. Former Deputy Secretary of State Armitage testified Hezbollah may be the A team of terrorists, and maybe al Qaeda is actually the B team. The former Director of Center Intelligence called Hezbollah a notch above al Qaeda organizationally, in part because of its deadly ties to Iran. Hezbollah receives $100 million annually from Iran, including 13,000 rockets. These rockets, which have rained down on Israeli citizens, are hidden in homes of supporters and in small factories scattered across Lebanon. Hezbollah launches unmanned aerial vehicles. Hezbollah's TV station, a vehicle for hate which the U.S. has placed on its terrorists exclusion list, has 10 million viewers around the world. Hezbollah is no ordinary terrorist group. Indeed, Israel is confronting Islamist terrorism's A Team. Before 9/11, Hezbollah was the terrorist group that had killed more Americans than any other. It has support cells in Europe, Africa, South America, Asia and here in North America. Dismantling Hezbollah is critical for U.S. and Israel's security. Iran no doubt hopes that the current crisis will distract the world's attention away from its pursuit of nuclear weapons. Yet today's crisis shows exactly why Iran's ambition must be thwarted, because an Iran with nuclear weapons will be even more aggressive in supporting terrorism in the Middle East and beyond. Mr. Speaker, Israelis are suffering. Lebanese, some of whom, as this resolution points out, are being used as human shields, are suffering. Too many are suffering at the hands of the Hezbollah terrorists. Hezbollah must be disarmed.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, as chairman of the Subcommittee on Terrorism and Nonproliferation, I rise today to strongly condemn the terrorist bombing that occurred yesterday in Mumbai, India. Yesterday, eight bombs ripped through crowded commuter trains headed for Mumbai, in a well coordinated terrorist attack, which claimed as many as 190 lives, and injured hundreds more. While there has been no immediate claim of responsibility for the bombings, the style of attacks and targeting of mass transportation share the tactics of al Qaeda and Kashmiri militants. While we commiserate with India, we must also view these attacks as a reminder that terrorism is indeed a global struggle. It is often said that India and America have a natural bond as two of the largest democracies. Today we share a bond of a common enemy: what the 9/11 commission identified as Islamist terrorism. Today our thoughts are with the people of India, and I am confident that the aftermath of these attacks, we will see all the resilience that is embodied in the Indian people.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, the Subcommittee on International Terrorism that I chair held two field hearings last week, one in San Diego and one in Laredo, Texas, on border vulnerabilities and international terrorism. The unfortunate fact is that we live in a time when terrorists want to hit us as hard as they can. And it is elementary that to defend ourselves against these determined and resourceful enemies, our border must be secure or, as the Border Patrol says, ``We must have operational control of the border.'' We don't have that right now, and we don't have that despite a tenfold increase in what Republicans have done to fund homeland security. But we need border fencing. And in Laredo, Texas, sheriffs told us of drug cartels and smuggling rings increasingly well equipped and more brazen than ever in attacking law enforcement officials. The Border Patrol warns of potential terrorists employing these networks to enter our country. Last year, it apprehended illegal border crossers from many countries designated state sponsors of terrorism or countries where terrorist organizations are active. The sheriffs we heard from strongly seconded the Border Patrol's concerns about terrorists crossing our porous borders. Colleagues, immigration reform must be national security reform.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to an exceptional woman from my district, Myldred E. Jones, a resident of Los Alamitos, California, for 38 years, a retired Navy lieutenant commander, and founder of Casa Youth Shelter, and she passed away at the age of 96 on Monday, June 19. She was a consultant for Youth Affairs for former Governor Ronald Reagan, and during that time, she recognized the desperate need to shelter runaway and throwaway teens who faced danger on the streets. So she cofounded the first adolescent hotline, which quickly spread across the Nation and is now international in scope. She founded We Care and Hotline of Southern California, dedicated to youth in crisis. At the age of 69, when most people are settled into retirement, Myldred sold her home to finance another nonprofit corporation, Casa Youth Shelter. Her vision and dream of helping children in need became a reality, and the woman who began by sacrificing marriage and children for service to country, dedicated 29 years to accepting and loving and sheltering at-risk youth. She was born in Philadelphia, the second of four children. She earned her B.A. at Wittenberg College in Springfield, Ohio. She did her graduate studies at UCLA. In 1942, the wartime call to service led her into the Navy as part of the first contingent of California WAVES to be called to active duty. She served with distinction during World War II and the Korean War, rising to the rank of lieutenant commander, and she was the first female faculty member in the Armed Forces Graduate School of Information. She served as assistant director of the Department of Welfare-Navy Relief Society and as the naval liaison to both the United Nations and the American Red Cross. After her military discharge, she was active in the civil rights movement, marching with Martin Luther King from Selma to Montgomery. She also joined with Cesar Chavez on his marches for the United Farm Workers. Myldred's military and humanitarian accomplishments were recognized by five of our United States Presidents, and I am very honored to stand before you today to remember the life of such a caring and compassionate social-entrepreneur citizen and patriot. She will be remembered and truly missed for her lifelong dedication and service. In Honor and Remembrance of Colonel Young Oak Kim Mr. Speaker, this month marks the 56th anniversary of the outbreak of the Korean War, and I am saddened to report that Colonel Young Oak Kim, an American hero in the Korean struggle, passed away on December 29, 2005. Colonel Kim served admirably in the United States Army since January of 1941, during World War II. He was assigned to the 100th Infantry Battalion, a segregated unit of Japanese Americans. When asked by his commanding officer if he would like to transfer, knowing the historical conflicts between Koreans and Japanese, Kim stated they were all Americans and they would fight together. Kim is remembered for the Battle of Anzio, in which he volunteered to capture German soldiers for intelligence information. He crawled over 600 yards under German observation posts with no cover. He captured two prisoners and obtained information that contributed to the fall of Rome. Consequently, he was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross. He reenlisted in the Army in 1950 and entered the Korean conflict with poise and bravery. He took part in the U.N. Forces drive into the north, leading a battalion, and was awarded a second Silver Star and a Bronze Star for his relentless efforts in a series of battles which pushed the final DMZ north. Colonel Kim's successes on the battlefield came with a price. Both of his legs were seriously injured, but retiring from the Army only energized his continuous dedication to walk on the path of democracy and freedom. He dedicated the rest of his life to founding many Asian American civic organizations and serving on the board of the Go For Broke Educational Foundation which keeps alive the American values of courage, honor, determination, loyalty, and justice for all. Colonel Kim was the recipient of three Purple Hearts, the National Order of the Legion of Honor, the highest military honor in France, for his efforts in taking French towns, and the Knight Grand Cross Military Order of Italy, the highest military honor there, recognitions that underscore the courage Colonel Kim embodied that eventually contributed to the defeat of fascism in Europe and the containment of communism in East Asia. There is no doubt that his courage and sacrifice is to be treasured, and sometimes it is through bitter conflicts that the best of our country shine bright amidst the seeming darkness and despair that this 56th anniversary may remind us of. It is through times like these that we reflect on the unity, the unity of our countrymen and the unity between the United States and South Korea, that will lead to better global cooperation and peace in the years to come. Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, I would like to join our united country in saluting Colonel Young Oak Kim, a genuine American hero.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. It becomes clearer by the day, Mr. Speaker, that we are confronting a brutal, determined, and resourceful enemy: Islamist terrorism, as the 9/11 Commission identified it. We have seen messianic, violent ideologies before, but al Qaeda and its ilk represent a more severe threat. In today's world, terrorists could acquire weapons of mass destruction. Bin Laden has made clear his intention to do so. It was such a concern that led President Bush to remove Saddam Hussein from power, and Iraqis are better off for it. We have heard legitimate debate of choices made in Iraq: Disbanding the Iraqi army, troop levels, and we have heard other critiques. Looking back, it is clear that this mission's difficulty and expense were underestimated. Hopefully, we have improved our intelligence. But dwelling on past choices does not get us ahead. Looking ahead, I don't see how we succeed by immediately withdrawing, as some are calling for. The position that our troops should stay longer in Iraq makes us all uncomfortable. But an alternative, an immediate withdrawal, concedes that Iraq will fall into chaos, because there is no way that the Iraqi security forces could stand alone yet. That is the judgment of our military professionals. So if you are going to argue that the costs of staying are too high, you are obligated to calculate the cost of withdrawing or the cost of what most certainly would be our defeat. The real world is dangerous, and unpleasant choices must be made. An honest appraisal is that we don't know Iraq's future, but we know with far greater certainty that an American withdrawal would spin Iraq into chaos. Bedlam in the region would likely follow. This outcome would be a stunning boost for jihadists, the forces determined to deliver as big a blow as they can against the American people. We owe our Nation and the Iraqi people our continued effort. We know Iraq today is a central front in our struggle against terrorism. Al Qaeda has said it, and last week's killing of al Zarqawi in Iraq made it clear that our success there and our success in the high stakes fight against terrorism go hand in hand.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to engage the chairman of the subcommittee, Mr. Kolbe, in a colloquy. Mr. Chairman, as you know, on Tuesday the administration successfully concluded negotiations for the fourth replenishment of the Global Environment Facility, the GEF. These have been long and detailed negotiations that had been scheduled to be concluded last year. The GEF is an important international institution for protection of the global environment, and we should be pleased that negotiations have come, frankly, to a very successful resolution. The Treasury Department, which conducted the negotiations on behalf of the United States, got, in essence, all of the reforms it demanded. These include the items mentioned on the report language accompanying the bill, including the two major changes proposed by the U.S.: first, plans to apply a resource allocation framework to the entire GEF portfolio of new projects by 2010; second, enhanced fiduciary standards for agents that the GEF works with, including a prohibition of new funding to agencies that do not meet the standards. The agreement also resolved the other outstanding issues to our satisfaction: removal of language regarding arrears that were objectionable to the United States; a provision regarding expanding the number of agencies the GEF works with; a provision on institutional effectiveness; and a firm target for satisfactory outcome ratings for GEF projects. Based on this outcome, the United States negotiators pledged a total of $320 million in U.S. contributions to the GEF over the next 4 years, $80 million a year, starting in fiscal year 2007. I support the administration's new commitment to the GEF, and I urge the chairman to help the administration live up to this promise that has been made to the other donors to provide $80 million for the GEF in the bill that is ultimately sent to the President. The bill before us underfunds this commitment by $23.75 million and, as it stands, represents a 26 percent decrease in U.S. commitment to the GEF. Mr. Chairman, we engaged, you and I, in a colloquy last year on the GEF, and you committed to work to secure funding at conference for the GEF if it completed reforms associated with the previous replenishment. The GEF did complete those reforms, and I want to thank you right now for your support last year.

Mr. ROYCE. I yield to the gentleman from Arizona for a response.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule. This legislation, while not perfect, is a step in the right direction. What it does is begin to draw brighter lines for Members and for staff and for lobbyists and the public. It increases oversight, and it increases accountability. The bill also addresses earmarks. Too often earmarks are placed in legislation at the behest of lobbyists, many times at the last minute to avoid scrutiny. This bill would require that lists of earmarks in legislation be made public before votes on bills or conference reports, and that any Member could bring a point of order against the list of earmarks and subject it to a 30-minute debate. Reform would be meaningless without changes in the way earmarks are handled. We need fiscal restraint. We need common sense when it comes to the budget. The future of all Americans depends on an economy free of crippling deficits, free of crippling tax hikes, and free of a skyrocketing national debt. The extent of which earmarks unnecessarily burden the American taxpayers is unprecedented. Last year's earmarks amounted to nearly $100 for every man, woman and child in America. While lobbying reform is necessary to preserve the integrity of our government, earmark reform is vital to our long-term fiscal well-being. Bringing earmarks to the light of day will promote fiscal responsibility, and it is going to promote more effective government as well. So, Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule for lobbying reform.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. I thank the gentleman from Arizona and the gentlewoman from New York, and certainly the chairman of the committee. Amendment No. 26 Offered by Ms. Kaptur

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, this goes to the issue of $50 million in economic support funds for Liberia. What I wanted to say, on this issue, is that the United States has been very generous with Liberia. We have committed nearly $1.5 billion, and that includes the funding for U.N. peacekeeping, and of course President Bush deployed U.S. Marines in Liberia to end the fighting there. My concern is that the former Liberian President, Charles Taylor, frankly, is first among warlords. He faces a 17-count indictment by the U.S. backed Special Court for his crimes against humanity, and yet he is living in cushy exile in Nigeria. This is a problem on several counts. Taylor must face justice for the killing and maiming that he engineered. Bringing him to the Special Court will end the cycle of impunity that destabilizes West Africa, and most pressing to today's business, Taylor remains a threat to the progress that the U.S. has done so much to achieve. It is probable that left in exile, Taylor will return to Liberia, as he has pledged to do, and knock over all that we have helped build up, throwing that region back into chaos. Congress passed a resolution calling for Taylor to be sent to the Special Court. Yesterday, Liberia's new President addressed this Congress. She had an inspiring message. But what many human rights and civil society groups were hoping to hear was a loud and clear call for Taylor to be turned over to the court now before it is too late. While Taylor is in Nigeria, Nigeria's president has said he would honor an extradition request made by Liberia's new president. We are waiting for that request. This bill would tack on an added $50 million in emergency spending for Liberia. I am worried about the message this sends about our seriousness of purpose regarding Charles Taylor. We continue our generosity, yet the Liberian president continues to defy the wishes of many Liberians by not acting to bring Charles Taylor to justice. So, Mr. Chairman, I considered offering an amendment to strike or condition this $50 million. What I seek instead is to hear from you on this issue.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of National Peace Corps Day, which was last Tuesday, February 28th. In my travels to Africa, I have had the chance to meet with many Peace Corps volunteers. The commitment these men and women have shown is extremely impressive and is to be commended. The work that Peace Corps volunteers have done to address the HIV/ AIDS pandemic is invaluable. Volunteers have worked hard to carry out the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS relief, and are active in 9 of the 15 Emergency Plan countries. Mr. Speaker, I have seen the valuable work the Peace Corps is doing in Africa, and throughout the world. It deserves our recognition and support. Under the leadership of Director Gaddi Vasquez, the Peace Corps is well poised to address the rapidly evolving challenges of the developing world.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. I thank the chairwoman for yielding. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of this resolution. This resolution rightfully condemns Iranian noncompliance with its nonproliferation obligations and calls upon the U.N. Security Council to expeditiously consider this matter. Madam Speaker, this is a grave matter, one deserving of this House's full and careful consideration. Iran, the most active state sponsor of terrorism, is seeking nuclear weapons. Its regime denies it, but the U.S. and many other nations know otherwise. Iran has a long record of deceiving international inspectors and has a history of dealing with the A.Q. Khan network. As chairman of the Subcommittee on Terrorism and Nonproliferation, nothing worries me more than this deadly combination of terrorism and WMD. For a closed country such as Iran, we actually know a great deal about the Iranian nuclear program. IAEA inspectors have played a key role in spotlighting Iranian behavior. In its most recent update to the 35 member IAEA Board of Governors, inspectors reported that Iran has in its possession a document on the production of uranium metal hemispheres. This is of great significance, as the IAEA identified this document as being related to the fabrication of nuclear weapon components, the first time the international body has attributed a nuclear weapons purpose to activities by Iran. Madam Speaker, if Iran were to go nuclear, many other countries in this combustible region, including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria and Turkey, to name a few, might follow. This proliferation would pose a grave threat to our security and certainly the security of our allies. Some criticize our European partners for failing in their negotiations with Iran. I agree that it has taken us too long to get to this point, but, frankly, when you think about it, our hand is strengthened at this point because of the European involvement. At the IAEA vote the other week, we had the permanent five members of the Security Council united. I am under no illusions that this united front will last, but it is an important first step. We will also hear from some that the administration has outsourced its diplomacy to the Europeans and has stood by as Iran moves toward a nuclear weapon. I will remind those that we alone cannot meet all security threats. We need partners. It is time to start challenging the norms that have developed over time. The Iranians skillfully talk about their inalienable rights under the nonproliferation treaty to develop the full nuclear fuel cycle, including its most sensitive aspects. Indeed, in the eyes of the IAEA, Iran's crime has been its failure to report its nuclear materials and the technology, not the nuclear activities themselves, including uranium enrichment. Under the guise of the NPT, Iran is walking right up to the edge of developing nuclear weapons. This is a violation of the spirit if not the letter of the NPT. My subcommittee will soon take a close look at this issue. This notion of rights has to be challenged, because if we don't, the world will be a very, very dangerous place. Mr. Speaker, there are no easy answers. We need to think long and hard about what types of sanctions are constructive in reaching the goal of preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons. This challenge will require careful and marked consideration by the administration, Congress, and our partners as we move forward. It is too serious for anything else.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for the time. For those of us that are deficit hawks and have pushed this bill to cut spending by $40 billion, I think it is important to recognize that between 1995 and 2005, we have seen spending swell on the part of the Federal Government from $1.5 trillion to $2.5 trillion. We have seen it go up $1 trillion in 10 years, and we could cooperate I guess to push it up another trillion, but let me explain my concerns with the national debt that is past $8 trillion and a deficit that is projected to hit $337 billion. If we fail to confront this challenge of ever higher spending, crowding out the private sector, then the coming decades will be very difficult. Our standard of living will decline, and we will become a much more vulnerable country. This Deficit Reduction Act, this $40 billion, is a good start. I think that we recognize that Americans, if they ran their personal finances the way the Federal Government has been run, we would be close to bankruptcy. I think Americans recognize it is time for belt tightening, and I think they know that an attempt to just keep increasing the public sphere at the expense of the private sphere and increasing taxes as a result is not the answer. We need fiscal restraint. We need common sense when it comes to the budget. The future of all Americans depends on an economy free of crippling deficits, free of crippling tax hikes and free of a skyrocketing national debt. It is incumbent on all of us that we step up to the plate and take responsibility for the Nation's future and that immediate future holds frankly a massive cost that I think all of us know is before us because we have a generation of baby boomers that are set to retire. If we are to ensure the long-term solvency of Medicare and Social Security then we must ensure not only that the budget is balanced but that we begin to pay down our enormous national debt.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I am urging my colleagues to support this amendment. We need only look at a new study done by a staff member of the 9/11 Commission to see why we need to ensure that the U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Service has a strong law enforcement component, which this amendment guarantees, and why we need to have stronger measures to fight fraud. In this study, they looked at 94 terrorists, including six of the 9/ 11 hijackers, who have operated on the U.S. soil between the early 1990s and 2004, and here is what they found: Two-thirds, 59 of them, two-thirds of the foreign-born terrorists studied committed immigration benefits fraud prior to or in conjunction with taking part in terrorist activity. In 47 of these instances, immigration benefits sought or acquired prior to 9/11 enabled the terrorists to stay in the United States after 9/11 and continue their terrorist activities. In two of these instances, terrorists were able to acquire immigration benefits after 9/11. There were 11 cases of passport fraud and 12 instances of visa fraud amongst these 94 terrorists. In total, 34 individuals were charged with making false statements to an immigration official. Fraud was used not only to gain entry into the U.S. but also to remain in the country. And once they were in the United States, 23 terrorists applied for lawful permanent residence. Sixteen of those were approved by the INS. Twenty-one terrorists applied for naturalization, and 20 of them were approved and became citizens. We need this amendment to ensure the U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Service focuses on a law enforcement component to act as a backstop to interior and Customs enforcement, and we fund it by providing that aliens using our immigration system pay a modest security fee to provide USCIS the resources and personnel it needs to fully investigate and prosecute immigration benefits fraud and corruption. And just as importantly, it stops potential fraud by prohibiting the granting of any immigration benefits that are in question until a thorough investigation has been conducted. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin. (Mr. SENSENBRENNER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, we do not want these agencies to waive instances where they have not had time to do the criminal background checks or to check the terrorist watch list. And in order to make it timely, in the amendment, we provide the revenue by having aliens who use our immigration system pay a modest security fee. That provides the very resources necessary here. What do those resources go to besides to ensure this is done in a timely manner? Well, this amendment also consolidates the data- gathering function of the Office of Fraud Detection and National Security in a law-enforcement focused division whose mission is to detect, investigate and prosecute fraud and corruption, whether internal or external to USCIS, and to serve as a centralized security- related information clearinghouse for USCIS. So this information is shared, and it encourages the criminal investigators responsible for rooting out corruption and preventing immigration benefits fraud to partner with the adjudications officers so that fraud may be detected and prevented early in the application process. For all of these reasons, I think this answers the very concerns raised by the gentlewoman's objection, and it certainly provides the additional resources to do it. Thus, I urge adoption of the amendment, and I would just close by pointing out the one inescapable fact of the 94 terrorists studied in this country since 9/11: Two-thirds of these foreign-born terrorists committed fraud, got past our immigration system prior to taking part in attempted terrorist operations in our country. It only makes sense to tighten the system and ensure that we have the proper investigations to catch the flags which had we caught prior to 9/11 might have prevented a terrorist attack. This amendment addresses precisely that problem.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Campbell amendment. This legislation is quite straightforward. It informs our States and localities to enforce the law. That sounds ridiculous to us, I am sure. But the fact is that one of the main problems with our immigration laws is that we are not enforcing them. And under the immigration reform legislation we passed in 1996, we prohibited States and localities from barring their entities and barring officials from providing immigration information to the Department of Homeland Security. Now, these counties and these States have decided to defy the law. There should be a cost for that. And the cost, according to this amendment, which says we mean what we say, the cost is that they would receive no grant amounts made available to any Federal, State, or local government agency or entity that violates the law. The rule of law is important. Support this amendment.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment. Of course, the circumstance is that in San Diego this fence has worked. In San Diego those crossing and apprehended where we have erected this fence have dropped from 202,000 a year in 1992 to less than 9,000 by 2004. So, yes, people still find a way around the fence, but not many. And if we are going to be serious, the establishment of a border fence project like this is probably going to have the same impact on these other communities that it has on San Diego, which is to say crime rates have fallen to a fraction of what they were. San Diego is no longer one of the most prolific drug smuggling corridors. So where is the fence needed? On these corridors you see here. This is where we can have the maximum impact. Why is it important? Partly because this has become post-9/11 a national security concern. If we do nothing to stop people attempting to enter illegally off our southern borders, when we know that al Qaeda has already indicated that its intention is to send agents over the southern border of the United States with the intent of carrying out an attack on the United States, we are not doing our jobs under the Constitution of the United Nations to protect the American public. Now, will we catch everyone? Maybe not, but 3,000 people from state sponsors of terrorism have been stopped to date, and this is a chance to make certain that al Qaeda operatives do not have an easier chance of getting into the United States.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Utah for the time, and I rise also in support of this resolution supporting the goals and supporting the ideals of Korean-American Day, and as mentioned by Chairman Davis, I am an original cosponsor of the bill. The Republic of Korea has been an ally and a friend of the United States now for many decades, and over this time, South Korea has emerged as a major economic partner for the United States. Korea is the U.S.'s seventh largest trading partner. That is ahead of Western European countries such as France and Italy, and frankly, it is our sixth largest export market. The U.S. is Korea's largest export market, its second largest source of imports and the largest supplier of foreign direct investment into South Korea. South Korea is also a very key ally of the United States, and as chairman of the U.S.-Republic of Korea Interparliamentary Exchange, I can report that many in this body recognize the importance of this resolution. I frequently travel to South Korea on the mission of building this relationship. It is vital that the two countries work closely together to address the difficult security challenges in northeast Asia. There are now more than 1 million Korean-Americans living in the United States. A large body of Korean-Americans are in southern California. From the first 100 who immigrated to the United States in the early 20th century, Koreans have become an integral part of our country. Today, one out of every eight Korean-Americans is an entrepreneur, owning his or her own business. In my own district, I am continually impressed with the Korean community and their commitment in upholding their own rich heritage and their commitment to education. The United States, and California in particular, have been enriched and defined by the contributions of Korean-Americans in a wide variety of fields. Korean-Americans have invigorated businesses and civic institutions, certainly academic communities and science across the country. Korean- owned businesses employ more than a third of the million men and women, generating sales and receipts of around $50 billion a year. This legislation gives Congress the chance to recognize the importance Korean-Americans play in our community by establishing Korean-American Day.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Garrett).