Bennie Thompson

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Reserving the right to object, Madam Chairman, I would just say to my colleague that we have not been made aware of this amendment, and if for no other reason than we have not seen it.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. I yield to the gentleman from Georgia.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Chairman, I encourage Members to vote ``no'' on the Norwood amendment. The Norwood amendment seeks to clarify the inherent authority of State and local law enforcement to apprehend, detain, remove, and transport illegal aliens in the routine course of duty. That is not what it does. State and local police already have authority to report criminals who are foreign nationals to the Department of Homeland Security and to assist the Federal Government in criminal investigations. But current law does not allow law enforcement to pick up immigrants and deport them unilaterally. That is essentially what this amendment allows. Do you want to give a local law enforcement officer the authority to remove people who they may suspect are in this country illegally; or would you prefer to have the Department of Homeland Security do that? Section 287(g) of INA, which provides for local law enforcement to enter into agreements with ICE, does not allow local law enforcement to remove an alien. This amendment is also frightening because it allows a local police officer who receives no training at all on immigration law to deport someone. How does this police officer know that it is someone who should be deported? What documents should he ask for? What law has he violated? This is a terrible amendment, Madam Chairman. Countless State and local police agencies have expressed concern about undermining public safety when ordinary immigrants start seeing them as agents of the Federal immigration service. We have comments from the chief of police in Nashville; chief of police in Hamtramck, Michigan; the sheriff and assistant sheriff in Orange County; along with Chief William Finney of the St. Paul Police Department, who all have expressed real concern about the apprehension, detaining, and deportation of illegal immigrants. Instead of focusing on training State and locals to do the job of our fellow law enforcement officers, we need to do more to train and provide Federal law enforcement with the resources it needs to fully carry out the responsibilities of the Department to enforce immigration and Customs violations. DHS already faces challenges in cross-training its own personnel and integrating the various components into a cohesive unit and, thus, would face challenges in developing a cross-training manual for State and local law enforcement personnel. Madam Chairman, this is why I am requesting that Members vote ``no'' on this amendment. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. As I indicated earlier, Madam Chairman, the gentleman sought to clarify his amendment without providing us with the opportunity to see it and, for that reason, we objected. But even with the clarification, it still would have been problematic for our side. So for that reason, Madam Chairman, I continue to object and to oppose the amendment. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would like to say to my colleague every immigrant is not a terrorist. I would assume that was an error in the gentleman's comment. Clearly we have to be very careful. That is a Federal responsibility. What we are doing is passing that responsibility to State and local law enforcement and not funding the Department that ought to be having the responsibility for immigration. Madam Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Madam Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. This amendment, although well intended, crosses the line from my standpoint because it moves us away from a Federal responsibility to a State responsibility. This amendment tries to clarify the existing authority of State and local law enforcement personnel to apprehend, detain, remove and transport illegal aliens in the routine course of duty. Additionally, this amendment requires DHS to establish a training manual on this matter and set forth simple guidelines for making that training available. State and local police already authorize and train to notify Federal law enforcement officials, are already highly qualified, and are fully trained to identify foreign nationals in custody. Additionally, training in immigration law is not a simple task. A manual is simply not sufficient to train officers in the complexity of immigration law. For example, DHS already faces challenges in cross-training its personnel and integrating the various components into a cohesive unit; and, thus, would face challenges in developing a cross-training manual for State and local law enforcement personnel. So for these reasons, I am in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. I yield to the gentleman from Georgia.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of the time. Mr. Speaker, the motion to recommit would authorize full funding for all of the homeland security measures called for in the Intelligence Reform Act adopted last year: aviation security research and development, full detection systems, biological, chemical, radiation and explosive materials, passenger baggage screening equipment, air cargo security, Federal air marshals and border security measures. It also includes a requirement that within 3 years all air cargo on passenger planes be screened. Mr. Speaker, I ask for a ``yes'' vote on this motion to recommit. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. I am, Mr. Speaker, in its present form.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Reclaiming my time, Madam Chairman, I object to the change.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I rise and express strong support for the amendment of the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Hooley). It sends a strong and simple message to Congress: do not raise aviation passenger fees. I strongly believe that raising fees will place an additional burden on the flying public and could weaken the economic strength of domestic commercial aviation. Mr. Chairman, I strongly support the Hooley amendment and urge my colleagues in the House to vote in favor of this important amendment.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell) and others have indicated the position that the minority supports. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell).

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to extend the debate by 2 minutes on each side.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of the time to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez), the author of the amendment.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in support of this amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez). Terrorism experts have called the area between Port Elizabeth and Newark International Airport in New Jersey ``the most dangerous two miles in America,'' an area that includes dozens of vulnerable chemical plants, oil storage tanks, refineries, and other critical infrastructure systems within close proximity of Manhattan and the densely populated cities of northern New Jersey. Experts estimate that a terrorist attack in this area could pose a potentially lethal threat to 12 million people living within a 14-mile radius. The Menendez amendment would require the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security to report to Congress on how to coordinate and protect the people and infrastructure in this particularly vulnerable region. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Yes, Mr. Chairman

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment. It is a commonsense amendment. We have to do all we can to protect the flying public. As has already been said, our pilots are the last line of defense to protect the flying public. By training them with this program and providing all of the necessary background checks, there is no excuse for not making this program successful. I compliment the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica) and join the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) in support of this amendment, and I look forward to its passage.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, for the record, I am in support of this amendment, as are the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell). This amendment highlights the important need for the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security to coordinate the prioritization of the Nation's critical infrastructure with other relevant Federal agencies. By requiring the Secretary to enter such partnerships, the Department of Homeland Security can draw upon the institutional expertise of a variety of agencies. This is critical for completing an accurate, comprehensive and thorough assessment of terrorist threats to our country's critical infrastructure. Having seen the national asset database lists for Mississippi, I believe the Department needs as much help as it can get. Our Nation can no longer wait for an accurate prioritization of our most valuable asset. This is why I join my other colleagues and encourage Members to vote yes on this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition to the amendment for purposes of debate, although I do not oppose the amendment.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, as I have already indicated from my opposition to this amendment, we are moving toward making States and localities assume a Federal responsibility. This is not in the best interest of homeland security. We have certain things as a Federal Government that we should do. Immigration protection is one of those items. I understand from my chairman that he is interested in trying to help, but at some point we have to do our job. What we need to do is provide the resources to the Department to make sure that the Department can do its job, not pass the buck to another State. You have heard from my colleague who used to be a State trooper who talks about the difficulties in crossing the lines. I ask my colleague to consider that, but I also ask opposition to the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time for closing.

Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.