Lamar Smith

Mr. SMITH of Texas

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

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3633) to amend the Controlled Substances Import and Export Act to place limitations on controlled substances brought into the United States from Mexico, as amended.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, S. 1759, the bill we are considering today would grant a Federal charter to the American GI Forum of the United States. This Senate bill is the companion measure to H.R. 3843, introduced and championed by my colleagues, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Rodriguez) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Bonilla). The American GI Forum will be holding its 50th anniversary celebration during August, and both House and Senate supporters have worked very hard to make sure we pass this legislation in time for that anniversary. The American GI Forum of the United States is a Hispanic veterans family organization. The organization has more than 100,000 Members and 500 chapters in 32 States and Puerto Rico. Although predominantly Hispanic, the American GI Forum is open to all veterans and their families. The House subcommittee of jurisdiction suspended the granting of Federal charters to private nonprofit organizations in 1989. Organizations seek Federal charters primarily to obtain the prestige of Federal Government recognition. The charter itself grants no special privileges or legal rights to the organization. It does, however, lead to the public perception that the Federal Government ensures the integrity and worthiness of the group's activities. Unfortunately, Congress does not have the resources to monitor the activities and operations of the numerous existing federally chartered organizations, and has maintained the moratorium to keep from exacerbating the problem. However, it was brought to the attention of the Congress that the circumstances surrounding the G.I. Forum are such that this exception needs to be made to the moratorium. The American G.I. Forum of the United States is a family-oriented Hispanic veterans group founded in 1948, and responds to a lack of representation available to Hispanic veterans within already established veterans' organizations. By the 1960s, membership had grown to an amount equal to or greater than that of the major veterans' organizations. At that time, the American G.I. Forum looked into obtaining a Federal charter like their contemporaries, the American Legion and the VFW. They were told they could not obtain one because their membership was not limited to veterans only. This was a clear misrepresentation. Restrictions on membership have never been a standard for the granting of a Federal charter. Prior to the American G.I. Forum's inquiry, many charters have been given to organizations that were not limited to veterans. The American G.I. Forum tried again to obtain a Federal charter in 1992, but by then the current moratorium on the granting of new Federal charters was in place. When looking at the historical record, it appears that the general prejudice against Hispanics during the 1950s and 1960s prevented the American G.I. Forum, representing a large portion of the veterans' community, from receiving a Federal charter, rather than any lack of qualification on their part. Research has already shown that no other group that has consistently represented such a large number of veterans and has been in existence since World War II was subject to rejection for a Federal charter. The American G.I. Forum's history and situation is unique. It is appropriate, as a matter of policy, to make this exception to the moratorium on the granting of Federal charters, and bestow upon this organization the recognition that should have been granted decades ago. I urge the House to pass this legislation to give the American G.I. Forum this long-overdue recognition. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on the Senate bill under consideration.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 1759) to grant a Federal charter to the American GI Forum of the United States.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Kentucky for yielding time to me. I rise in support of H.R. 4276. This bill, Mr. Chairman, takes important steps to deal with illegal immigration and related crimes, such as alien smuggling and drug smuggling. As in previous years, the bill provides for 1,000 new border patrol agents and 140 support personnel for those agents. These new agents can help the United States regain control of its borders. H.R. 4276 also addresses the INS's longstanding unresponsiveness to the problems imposed on communities by criminal illegal aliens. Too often the INS has failed to deport criminal aliens arrested by State and local police officers. The bill directs the INS to set up an around-the-clock 800 number that State and local officers can call to arrange for apprehension and removal of criminal aliens. The bill also directs the INS to deputize State law enforcement officials when requested, as authorized by the 1996 immigration reform law, so they can assist the INS in removing criminal aliens from the United States. Too often the INS has released criminal aliens into American communities because of inefficient use of limited detention space. H.R. 4276 provides substantial resources for a major increase in detention spaces available to the INS. Finally, Mr. Chairman, the bill directs the INS to maintain the integrity of immigration benefits by investigating and rejecting fraudulent applications. Equally as important, it also mandates improved speed and efficiency for serving immigration applicants, and provides important funding for that purpose, funding which was not requested by the administration. I urge my colleagues to support and vote for H.R. 4276, the Commerce, Justice, State, and the Judiciary appropriations bill.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

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

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman would continue to yield, as the chairman of the Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims and as a coauthor of the language in section 656, I will work with the gentleman, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul), and others who might be interested, to draft and enact legislation this Congress that will prevent the Department of Transportation, or any other agency or department of the executive branch, from establishing or requiring a national ID card that might result from the aforesaid rules proposed in the Federal Register on June 17, 1998.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman would yield, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Barr) is correct. The proposed rule does go far beyond the intent and scope of section 656 of the 1996 legislation.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman is correct, the legislation we passed was designed only to address necessary steps to deal with a specific problem, such as illegal immigration in the United States. It was not the intention of the bill or the Congress to establish a national ID, or to require that all States issue only driver's licenses in a format required by the Federal Government.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend from Virginia for yielding me time. Mr. Chairman, I strongly support the Goodlatte amendment to restore integrity to elections. There is no more revered right of citizenship than the right to vote. The 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act made it both a Federal crime and a deportable offense when noncitizens vote. Allowing noncitizens to vote cheapens the right for the rest of us. There is currently no satisfactory way for local registrars to ensure that there are no noncitizens on their voting rolls or for the Justice Department to enforce the penalties. Attempts have been made to check voting rolls against Immigration and Naturalization Service records in order to identify noncitizens. However, INS data, at best, can only tell us that a voter is a legal immigrant or a citizen. INS data cannot tell us whether a voter is in fact an illegal alien. I want to thank my friend from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte) for offering this amendment. The enactment of the motor-voter law and the loosening of voter registration requirements have released a flood of voter irregularities and illegalities across the country. Not only has motor- voter failed to increase voter turnout, it in fact has encouraged voter fraud. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and let the American people know that we will protect and honor their right to vote, and restore integrity to the election process.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support H.R. 3223, a bill designating the J.J. ``Jake'' Pickle Federal Building in Austin, Texas. Though Jake has been out of office for 5 years, his former constituents and fellow Texans still call on him and respect him because they all know what everyone knows about Jake--he really cares. Throughout his 30 years in Washington he never forgot who sent him or why he was there--to make the lives of his constituents and all Americans better. Of course no building named after Jake would be complete without the words ``Howdy, Howdy, Howdy'' inscribed over the entryway! Surely he is the quintessential Texan. All of us--Republicans and Democrats--continue to admire and appreciate Jake Pickle.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Gekas- McCollum-Smith amendment that preserves the rights of the states to set their own individual homestead exemptions. H.R. 3150, the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1998, is a necessary reform of our Nation's bankruptcy laws. But since 1867, Federal lawmakers have recognized the role of the states in determining what property is exempt under bankruptcy laws. Unfortunately, the language in this bill runs contrary to the Texas Constitution, as well as the Constitution of several other states. The homestead exemption was originally intended to protect families by ensuring that if a family hit hard times, they would retain some means of support. The need to protect families is no less important today. Our amendment simply preserves the right of states to provide a homestead exemption, and maintains a historical balance between the Federal Government and the states. It would also prevent State homestead exemptions from being abused by prohibiting the conversion of nonexempt assets into exempt homestead property within one year of filing for bankruptcy. That is a protection that needs to be emphasized. Mr. Chairman, this amendment both prevents abuses of the exemption and protects states' rights, and I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Virginia for yielding me the time. I support the religious freedom amendment, and I thank my friend, the gentleman from Oklahoma, for introducing the legislation. For 200 years our Constitution was interpreted as allowing for the free expression of religion. It was not until 1962 that a liberal Supreme Court changed Thomas Jefferson's meaning of the wall of separation between church and State. The right to free speech is one of the most highly revered rights in our Constitution, but the Constitution does not protect freedom from religion. It guards against having one religion imposed on us all. The drafters of the First Amendment did not intend to bar religious speech and actions. This amendment requires that those who express their religious beliefs receive the same treatment as those who express nonreligious views. For instance, it will prohibit discrimination against student religious groups and provide them the same opportunities nonreligious groups now enjoy. This amendment will allow public prayers to be offered but it will not require any student to participate. A single student will no longer be able to silence the prayers of others. I urge my colleagues to support the religious freedom amendment.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman of the Committee on Rules for yielding to me. Mr. Speaker, I do rise in support of this rule. The rule allows for a point of order to be raised on the provisions of the conference report that would expand by $818 million government benefits for noncitizens. These provisions were wholly outside the scope of either the House or Senate bills that were committed to the conference. The provision allowing the point of order is, first of all, about protecting the integrity of the process. The bill the House sent to conference did not contain the $818 million in food stamps for immigrants. The bill the Senate sent to the conference did not contain a provision for the $818 million in food stamps. But the conference report we are being asked to adopt today does contain such a provision, a provision inserted, without deliberation, by the Members of this body. The issue is not about immigrants. If the issue were about immigrants, we would be talking about the sponsors of these immigrants and the fact that they signed an affidavit and that they promised to take care of these individuals if they were not financially able to take care of themselves. To my knowledge, Mr. Speaker, not one time concerning the millions of noncitizens receiving government benefits today have we asked the sponsor to be responsible for that commitment, and we should not ask a single taxpayer to foot the bill until we have looked to the sponsors first. The issue, then, is not about immigrants. It is about priorities. The conference came up with $818 million, almost $1 billion, that could be reallocated to other programs. Apparently they decided that they had maximized funding of programs for the American farmer. Apparently they decided that food programs for women, children, and infants, the WIC program, did not need any additional funding this year. Apparently, they decided that food programs for impoverished elderly citizens were sufficiently funded to meet the needs for all the individuals at risk. I say ``apparently'' because neither my constituents nor those of the vast majority of the Members of the House were granted the opportunity guaranteed under the rules of the House to be heard on these priorities. Today, the issue is one of concern to my constituents, but tomorrow the issue may well be of concern to the constituents of other individuals when they see a conference report add additional programs. The rule before this body preserves the integrity of those rules and the process, the opportunity for all Americans to be heard on matters of public policy. Mr. Speaker, under this rule, the farm provisions will be able to move forward, and we will also preserve the integrity of the system, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, yesterday during Roll Call Vote 146, I voted aye believing that I was supporting Congresswoman Roukema's amendment #19 when in fact the vote was on Congressman Leach's amendment that I opposed. Please let the record reflect that I intended to vote no on Congressman Leach's amendment (Roll Call Vote 146), and aye on Congresswoman Roukema's amendment #19 (Roll Call Vote 147).

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the amendment be modified in the form at the desk.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, when the Committee on the Judiciary reported out H.R. 2578, the Visa Waiver Pilot Program was set to expire on September 30, 1997. The bill proposed to extend the program for 2 years until September 30, 1999; however, Congress acted in the Commerce, Justice, State appropriations bill for fiscal year 1998 to extend the program until April 30, 1998. Thus, in order that the House pass a full 2-year extension as originally planned, this amendment would extend the program until April 30, 2000. So I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. I understand that there is no objection. I appreciate the support of my colleague, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Watt).

Mr. SMITH of Texas. I am happy to yield just very briefly because I have more I would like to say.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. SMITH of Texas. I would simply ask the gentleman, I think he is referring to legal immigrants because I assume he is not endorsing illegal immigration in America.