Transcripts For CSPAN3 House Committee Marks Up Homeland Sec

If were to be successful in this third wave. Watch the communicators, tonight at 8 00 eastern on cspan 2. Last week members of the House Appropriations committee met to mark up legislation for Homeland Security. It included provisions to address drug and people smuggling while allocating 1. 6 billion for construction of a wall along the u. S. Southern border. The bill also addressed Immigration Enforcement, Aviation Security and Natural Disaster response. This is close to three hours. Morning. Meeting will come to order. Thank you all for being here today. We meet today to consider both Homeland Security appropriations bill and interior appropriations bill. We made some remarkable progress over the past month. I hope well continue today. I turn it to chairman carter to present the fiscal year 2018 Homeland Security bill. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Before i start, its sort of a tradition to have some kind of snack from your home district. The most famous thing from my district are the doughnuts. National meetings have declared it the best doughnut in the world. Theyre so good, they dont travel well. As a substitute, we have a large Czech Community in my district. We have kulachis of all sorts across the haul. We would love everyone to eat one. Our Czech Community is very proud of them and theyre very good. I want to let you know about that. We had them here last year. Theyre good. The question is what are they. Theyre a roll with fruit on top and theyre good. Judge carter is recognized. Thank you. Now that i have gotten the important stuff out of the way, i am glad to be here to present the fiscal year 2018 department of Homeland Security appropriations bill to the committee. The recommendation is 42. 5 billion in nondefense discretionary spending. 1. 9 billion in defense spending. 6. 8 billion for Disaster Relief. The total is 51. 1 billion. Which is 327 million above the president s requests and 1. 8 billion above fiscal year 2017 baseline. The subcommittees recommendation stands in sharp contrast to prior years because the president s budget request is a major policy change in how dhs secures the border and enforces Immigration Laws. Consequently many of the minority are opposed to the bill. I regret not having a unified subcommittee mark. I respect everyones right to assert reasonable and honest dissent. Moreover, i have no doubt that everyone on this committee shares the same objectives for dhs, to ensure our homeland is safe, secure, and resilient against terrorism and other hazards. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, i realize that we are going to spend a lot of time today debating the pros and cons of spending nearly 1. 6 billion on border wall construction and 3. 2 billion for 44,000 detention beds among other items. These are significant increases in spending and are worthy of debate. All too often the discussion veers off to heartbreaking stories of illegal migration. But that is only part of the story. The rest is that, if Illegal Migrants can exploit the nations border so can terrorists, drug smugglers and Human Trafficking organizations. This is unacceptable. The recommendation in this bill that the bill change that thats dynamic, they enforce current structures in build sturdy, secure fencing where Border Control agents have convinced me and the committee where it is needed. Tary invest in technologies that assist those who work on the border. Theyre not targeted at areas like the Big Bend National park and arizona forbidding desert where Mother Nature has secured the border in ways man cannot enhance. Critics plain that putting physical barriers on the border wont work and are not necessary. With respect, i disagree. In early 1990s, over 50,000 people were apprehended as they attempted to illegally cross the border into san diego section. To combat these illegal crossings, cbp installed security infrastructure improvements. In 2016, the number of apprehensions had plummeted from 500,000 to 25,000. Similar Success Stories occurred across el centro, el paso, yuma and other sectors. I am committed to bringing the same success to texas. Colleagues, this bill is focused on National Security and Law Enforcement. It sends a powerful message that, if you break our nations laws and cross the border illegally, you will suffer the consequences which are apprehension and a guaranteed stay in detention. With that, here are the additional highlights of the bill. For cbp, in addition to the wall and associated technology, the mark supports increases in Border Patrol by 500 agents. For i. C. E. , in addition to the funds for 44,000 detention beds, an increase of 4,676 over 2017, 18 million above the request is provided to expand Visa Security Program to two additional highthreat overseas locations. 186 million to increase investigative and support staff by 1600 people as requested. For fema. 3 billion for fema grants, Training Exercise programs, an increase of 939. 7 million above the request, which includes 25 million increase for nonprofit security grant program. 7. 3 billion requested for the Disaster Relief fund. For secret service. 1. 9 billion to ensure they are paid for the work they do. For tsa, full funding for transportation Security Officers to support Aviation Security and keep wait times down low. For coast guard, 19 million is provided for heavy icebreaker to continue programs, management activities and design work required to award a Production Contract in fiscal year 2019. 500 million for production of the first offshore patrol cutter, and long lead materials for opc number 2. 95 million for a fully missioned c130j to enhance long range surveillance capabilities. And, for Cyber Security, infrastructure and Infrastructure Protection. 950 million is provided to secure Government Network and prevent cyberattacks and 380 million for Infrastructure Protection programs, including electrical grid and Emergency Communications systems. Finally, the everify system allowing businesses to check whether employees are eligible to work in the United States is fully funded at 135. 1 million. Colleagues, this is a good bill. I ask you to support it. Im happy to answer any questions about this mark. Before i do, our Ranking Member is recognized and our full Committee Chairman Ranking Members for any comments they would like to make. Thank you, judge carter. Chairman carter. Recognize the Ranking Member miss ballard. As i said in our subcommittee markup, i greatly appreciate how you and your staff have been collegial, collaborative and receptive in developing this bill. We have a Good Partnership in working to address the needs of the department of Homeland Security and its dedicated personnel because we understand they are the ones doing the critical work of keeping our country safe. The positive aspects of this bill include restoration of fema preparedness grants to current year levels and increases in the nonprofit Security Program from 25 million to 50 million. There are also a significant number of constructive oversight directives in the Draft Committee report and welcomed funding levels for departmental oversight components like the office of civil rights and civil liberties. And i am grateful for the additional funding for child care subsidies for coast guard families and the continuation of the Cyber Security internship program. Most alarming, however, is that, because of the administrations claim that it is a matter of National Security, this bill recommends a 705 million increase for u. S. Interior Immigration Enforcement. Supporting 44,000 detention beds, an increase of 10,000 above last year, and the hiring of 1,000 additional i. C. E. Agents and officers to focus primarily on interior enforcement. There is certainly no disagreement. We should be removing dangerous individuals. However, i. C. E. s is targeting unaccompanied children seeking a asylum and targeting people who have lived here and paid taxes for decades with no criminal infractions. As a result. I. C. E. Interior arrests of noncriminals are up 157 over last year. These arrests are not required for our National Security or for our public safety. And they are having tragic consequences for individuals, families and communities all over our nation. Many in Law Enforcement tell us people are afraid to report serious crimes and are less willing to come forward as witnesses to crimes. Teachers tell me that immigrant and United States children alike are afraid to go to school or out to play, for fear their parents will be gone when they return home. The trauma that is being inflicted on entire communities without this country cannot be overstated. The only solution to this problem is comprehensive immigration reform. Another area of concern is a 1. 6 billion for new border infrastructure. The fy 17 funding bill required the secretary to submit a riskbased plan for imposing security along the border. We have yet to receive that plan. How can we support such an enormous cost without a comprehensive plan backed by a clear justification for why it should take priority over other critical investments. For these reasons, i cannot in good conscience support the bill in its current form. Instead of wasting money on an unnecessary wall and the enforcement of discriminatory policies, we should be investing our limited resources to address the real threats posed by dangerous criminal aliens and those who seek to do our country harm. This includes investing more resources in Cyber Security, Human Trafficking investigations, and coast guard vessels and aircraft to address our vulnerabilities along the alaskan coast and to enhance our limited drug interdiction efforts. We should invest more in new customs officers, research and technology and restoring funding for tsas Law Enforcement viper and officer reimburrsment programs. Being in this country illegally is a civil violation. We should not be spending excessive amounts of money for civil Immigration Enforcement at the expense of dangerous criminals and terrorist threats. Most of you in this room have family histories of immigrants who came here with little money or little more than the clothing on their backs. They lived with cousins and other relatives until they could find a job and eventually afford a place of their own. If Current Administration policies were in place when most American Families came to this land, few would have been allowed to enter the United States and many of us would not be here today. My familys history is a little different. My father served in this house for 30 years. He was a member of this committee and a cardinal. He was born in 1960 to the roybal family which traces back its roots in this country eight generations but the roybales never came to the United States. Rather, the United States came to the roybals when the part of mexico they settled in became a u. S. Territory and in 1912 the state of new mexico. Ers came to my mothers family to the part of mexico today known as san diego, california. But no matter how we became americans, the fact is that most of our families came here from somewhere else. The contributions of past newcomers help make our country the greatest nation in the world. Today, immigrants help keep america great. That reality was recognized by our government in the 1920s. Even after establishing the Border Patrol, setting up our first consular control system, requiring visas to be obtained abroad before admission to the u. S. , and putting in place numerical caps and quotas based on race and nationality, discretion was given to immigration officials to spend to suspend deportation in meritorious cases. And congress created policies allowing many european immigrants in the u. S. Without proper authorization to legalize their status. These rules made it possible for millions of people, including many of our ancestors, to come and remain in the United States and have the opportunity to realize the american dream. Todays immigrants deserve no less. I sincerely respect the fact that many of us have disagreements on how best to enforce our Immigration Laws. Unfortunately, the president s malignant immigration rhetoric has poisoned the waters. It has made it difficult for this congress to bridge our differences in a way that protects our homeland while still reflecting our American Values. The administration has said the law is the law and we must enforce it without discretion. Mr. Chairman, just as was true nearly a century ago, our immigration policies are as much a moral question as they are a legal one. Just as other Law Enforcement agencies have discretion in how to enforce our laws, so do agencies like i. C. E. And the department of Homeland Security. Just as former members of congress exercise discretion regarding policies impacting european immigrants. Members of this committee have discretion in how to vote on policies impacting immigrants of today. I am not making an argument for open borders or the elimination of our Immigration Laws. What i am trying to convey is my hope that, as we Work Together to find the right balance between legal and moral aspects of Immigration Enforcement, we do so guided by the same moral compass and with the same compassion for todays immigrants, many of whom are escaping the same kinds of tragedy circumstances as those we welcomed in the past. How can we not take into consideration our impact on real people who, by different policies or of the past or a different drawing of a border can be you or me. Mr. Chairman, let me reiterate how much i appreciate the way our subcommittee does its business. Even when we disagree, we do it with respect for one another and with respect for the institution in which we are honored to serve. I hope we will continue working together so by the end of this appropriations process we have a final bill both sides can fully support. In closing, i would be remiss if i did not acknowledge and thank my outstanding staff. Derek newbe. Matt smith, Robin Ellerbe and chris mallard. Chris romig, laura sillky. Grady boren and subcommittee staff director valerie baldwin. Thank you, mr. Chairman and i yield back. I thank the Ranking Member as well as chairman carter for their remarks. And lucille and i know that our fathers served together. I am so proud to be serving with you. We live in the greatest country on the face of the earth. Its good to know the ties that bind us are strong. Thank you so much for your remarks. This bill demonstrates our ironclad commitment to safeguarding our homeland and protecting our citizens. In total, it provides 44. 3 billion in discretionary funding for the department of Homeland Security to fulfill its mandates to secure our nation from the many threats we face, whether thats terrorism, criminals and illegal goods crossing our borders or attacks on our cyber networks. This is 1. 9 billion above the fiscal year 2017 bill which we recently passed. Its a strong investment in the security of our nation, our families, neighbors, schools and businesses. Critical resources are directed to customs and Border Protection to improve infrastructure and technology and put boots on the ground. This includes 1. 6 billion for physical barrier construction along the southern border and 100 million to hire 500 new Border Patrol agents. The bill also provides 7 billion for immigration and Customs Enforcement to ensure our laws are being followed. This includes funding for additional Law Enforcement officers, detention and removal programs, investigation programs that fight House Appropriations<\/a> committee met to mark up legislation for Homeland Security<\/a>. It included provisions to address drug and people smuggling while allocating 1. 6 billion for construction of a wall along the u. S. Southern border. The bill also addressed Immigration Enforcement<\/a>, Aviation Security<\/a> and Natural Disaster<\/a> response. This is close to three hours. Morning. Meeting will come to order. Thank you all for being here today. We meet today to consider both Homeland Security<\/a> appropriations bill and interior appropriations bill. We made some remarkable progress over the past month. I hope well continue today. I turn it to chairman carter to present the fiscal year 2018 Homeland Security<\/a> bill. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Before i start, its sort of a tradition to have some kind of snack from your home district. The most famous thing from my district are the doughnuts. National meetings have declared it the best doughnut in the world. Theyre so good, they dont travel well. As a substitute, we have a large Czech Community<\/a> in my district. We have kulachis of all sorts across the haul. We would love everyone to eat one. Our Czech Community<\/a> is very proud of them and theyre very good. I want to let you know about that. We had them here last year. Theyre good. The question is what are they. Theyre a roll with fruit on top and theyre good. Judge carter is recognized. Thank you. Now that i have gotten the important stuff out of the way, i am glad to be here to present the fiscal year 2018 department of Homeland Security<\/a> appropriations bill to the committee. The recommendation is 42. 5 billion in nondefense discretionary spending. 1. 9 billion in defense spending. 6. 8 billion for Disaster Relief<\/a>. The total is 51. 1 billion. Which is 327 million above the president s requests and 1. 8 billion above fiscal year 2017 baseline. The subcommittees recommendation stands in sharp contrast to prior years because the president s budget request is a major policy change in how dhs secures the border and enforces Immigration Law<\/a>s. Consequently many of the minority are opposed to the bill. I regret not having a unified subcommittee mark. I respect everyones right to assert reasonable and honest dissent. Moreover, i have no doubt that everyone on this committee shares the same objectives for dhs, to ensure our homeland is safe, secure, and resilient against terrorism and other hazards. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, i realize that we are going to spend a lot of time today debating the pros and cons of spending nearly 1. 6 billion on border wall construction and 3. 2 billion for 44,000 detention beds among other items. These are significant increases in spending and are worthy of debate. All too often the discussion veers off to heartbreaking stories of illegal migration. But that is only part of the story. The rest is that, if Illegal Migrants<\/a> can exploit the nations border so can terrorists, drug smugglers and Human Trafficking<\/a> organizations. This is unacceptable. The recommendation in this bill that the bill change that thats dynamic, they enforce current structures in build sturdy, secure fencing where Border Control<\/a> agents have convinced me and the committee where it is needed. Tary invest in technologies that assist those who work on the border. Theyre not targeted at areas like the Big Bend National<\/a> park and arizona forbidding desert where Mother Nature<\/a> has secured the border in ways man cannot enhance. Critics plain that putting physical barriers on the border wont work and are not necessary. With respect, i disagree. In early 1990s, over 50,000 people were apprehended as they attempted to illegally cross the border into san diego section. To combat these illegal crossings, cbp installed security infrastructure improvements. In 2016, the number of apprehensions had plummeted from 500,000 to 25,000. Similar Success Stories<\/a> occurred across el centro, el paso, yuma and other sectors. I am committed to bringing the same success to texas. Colleagues, this bill is focused on National Security<\/a> and Law Enforcement<\/a>. It sends a powerful message that, if you break our nations laws and cross the border illegally, you will suffer the consequences which are apprehension and a guaranteed stay in detention. With that, here are the additional highlights of the bill. For cbp, in addition to the wall and associated technology, the mark supports increases in Border Patrol<\/a> by 500 agents. For i. C. E. , in addition to the funds for 44,000 detention beds, an increase of 4,676 over 2017, 18 million above the request is provided to expand Visa Security Program<\/a> to two additional highthreat overseas locations. 186 million to increase investigative and support staff by 1600 people as requested. For fema. 3 billion for fema grants, Training Exercise<\/a> programs, an increase of 939. 7 million above the request, which includes 25 million increase for nonprofit security grant program. 7. 3 billion requested for the Disaster Relief<\/a> fund. For secret service. 1. 9 billion to ensure they are paid for the work they do. For tsa, full funding for transportation Security Officers<\/a> to support Aviation Security<\/a> and keep wait times down low. For coast guard, 19 million is provided for heavy icebreaker to continue programs, management activities and design work required to award a Production Contract<\/a> in fiscal year 2019. 500 million for production of the first offshore patrol cutter, and long lead materials for opc number 2. 95 million for a fully missioned c130j to enhance long range surveillance capabilities. And, for Cyber Security<\/a>, infrastructure and Infrastructure Protection<\/a>. 950 million is provided to secure Government Network<\/a> and prevent cyberattacks and 380 million for Infrastructure Protection<\/a> programs, including electrical grid and Emergency Communications<\/a> systems. Finally, the everify system allowing businesses to check whether employees are eligible to work in the United States<\/a> is fully funded at 135. 1 million. Colleagues, this is a good bill. I ask you to support it. Im happy to answer any questions about this mark. Before i do, our Ranking Member<\/a> is recognized and our full Committee Chairman<\/a> Ranking Member<\/a>s for any comments they would like to make. Thank you, judge carter. Chairman carter. Recognize the Ranking Member<\/a> miss ballard. As i said in our subcommittee markup, i greatly appreciate how you and your staff have been collegial, collaborative and receptive in developing this bill. We have a Good Partnership<\/a> in working to address the needs of the department of Homeland Security<\/a> and its dedicated personnel because we understand they are the ones doing the critical work of keeping our country safe. The positive aspects of this bill include restoration of fema preparedness grants to current year levels and increases in the nonprofit Security Program<\/a> from 25 million to 50 million. There are also a significant number of constructive oversight directives in the Draft Committee<\/a> report and welcomed funding levels for departmental oversight components like the office of civil rights and civil liberties. And i am grateful for the additional funding for child care subsidies for coast guard families and the continuation of the Cyber Security<\/a> internship program. Most alarming, however, is that, because of the administrations claim that it is a matter of National Security<\/a>, this bill recommends a 705 million increase for u. S. Interior Immigration Enforcement<\/a>. Supporting 44,000 detention beds, an increase of 10,000 above last year, and the hiring of 1,000 additional i. C. E. Agents and officers to focus primarily on interior enforcement. There is certainly no disagreement. We should be removing dangerous individuals. However, i. C. E. s is targeting unaccompanied children seeking a asylum and targeting people who have lived here and paid taxes for decades with no criminal infractions. As a result. I. C. E. Interior arrests of noncriminals are up 157 over last year. These arrests are not required for our National Security<\/a> or for our public safety. And they are having tragic consequences for individuals, families and communities all over our nation. Many in Law Enforcement<\/a> tell us people are afraid to report serious crimes and are less willing to come forward as witnesses to crimes. Teachers tell me that immigrant and United States<\/a> children alike are afraid to go to school or out to play, for fear their parents will be gone when they return home. The trauma that is being inflicted on entire communities without this country cannot be overstated. The only solution to this problem is comprehensive immigration reform. Another area of concern is a 1. 6 billion for new border infrastructure. The fy 17 funding bill required the secretary to submit a riskbased plan for imposing security along the border. We have yet to receive that plan. How can we support such an enormous cost without a comprehensive plan backed by a clear justification for why it should take priority over other critical investments. For these reasons, i cannot in good conscience support the bill in its current form. Instead of wasting money on an unnecessary wall and the enforcement of discriminatory policies, we should be investing our limited resources to address the real threats posed by dangerous criminal aliens and those who seek to do our country harm. This includes investing more resources in Cyber Security<\/a>, Human Trafficking<\/a> investigations, and coast guard vessels and aircraft to address our vulnerabilities along the alaskan coast and to enhance our limited drug interdiction efforts. We should invest more in new customs officers, research and technology and restoring funding for tsas Law Enforcement<\/a> viper and officer reimburrsment programs. Being in this country illegally is a civil violation. We should not be spending excessive amounts of money for civil Immigration Enforcement<\/a> at the expense of dangerous criminals and terrorist threats. Most of you in this room have family histories of immigrants who came here with little money or little more than the clothing on their backs. They lived with cousins and other relatives until they could find a job and eventually afford a place of their own. If Current Administration<\/a> policies were in place when most American Families<\/a> came to this land, few would have been allowed to enter the United States<\/a> and many of us would not be here today. My familys history is a little different. My father served in this house for 30 years. He was a member of this committee and a cardinal. He was born in 1960 to the roybal family which traces back its roots in this country eight generations but the roybales never came to the United States<\/a>. Rather, the United States<\/a> came to the roybals when the part of mexico they settled in became a u. S. Territory and in 1912 the state of new mexico. Ers came to my mothers family to the part of mexico today known as san diego, california. But no matter how we became americans, the fact is that most of our families came here from somewhere else. The contributions of past newcomers help make our country the greatest nation in the world. Today, immigrants help keep america great. That reality was recognized by our government in the 1920s. Even after establishing the Border Patrol<\/a>, setting up our first consular control system, requiring visas to be obtained abroad before admission to the u. S. , and putting in place numerical caps and quotas based on race and nationality, discretion was given to immigration officials to spend to suspend deportation in meritorious cases. And congress created policies allowing many european immigrants in the u. S. Without proper authorization to legalize their status. These rules made it possible for millions of people, including many of our ancestors, to come and remain in the United States<\/a> and have the opportunity to realize the american dream. Todays immigrants deserve no less. I sincerely respect the fact that many of us have disagreements on how best to enforce our Immigration Law<\/a>s. Unfortunately, the president s malignant immigration rhetoric has poisoned the waters. It has made it difficult for this congress to bridge our differences in a way that protects our homeland while still reflecting our American Values<\/a>. The administration has said the law is the law and we must enforce it without discretion. Mr. Chairman, just as was true nearly a century ago, our immigration policies are as much a moral question as they are a legal one. Just as other Law Enforcement<\/a> agencies have discretion in how to enforce our laws, so do agencies like i. C. E. And the department of Homeland Security<\/a>. Just as former members of congress exercise discretion regarding policies impacting european immigrants. Members of this committee have discretion in how to vote on policies impacting immigrants of today. I am not making an argument for open borders or the elimination of our Immigration Law<\/a>s. What i am trying to convey is my hope that, as we Work Together<\/a> to find the right balance between legal and moral aspects of Immigration Enforcement<\/a>, we do so guided by the same moral compass and with the same compassion for todays immigrants, many of whom are escaping the same kinds of tragedy circumstances as those we welcomed in the past. How can we not take into consideration our impact on real people who, by different policies or of the past or a different drawing of a border can be you or me. Mr. Chairman, let me reiterate how much i appreciate the way our subcommittee does its business. Even when we disagree, we do it with respect for one another and with respect for the institution in which we are honored to serve. I hope we will continue working together so by the end of this appropriations process we have a final bill both sides can fully support. In closing, i would be remiss if i did not acknowledge and thank my outstanding staff. Derek newbe. Matt smith, Robin Ellerbe<\/a> and chris mallard. Chris romig, laura sillky. Grady boren and subcommittee staff director valerie baldwin. Thank you, mr. Chairman and i yield back. I thank the Ranking Member<\/a> as well as chairman carter for their remarks. And lucille and i know that our fathers served together. I am so proud to be serving with you. We live in the greatest country on the face of the earth. Its good to know the ties that bind us are strong. Thank you so much for your remarks. This bill demonstrates our ironclad commitment to safeguarding our homeland and protecting our citizens. In total, it provides 44. 3 billion in discretionary funding for the department of Homeland Security<\/a> to fulfill its mandates to secure our nation from the many threats we face, whether thats terrorism, criminals and illegal goods crossing our borders or attacks on our cyber networks. This is 1. 9 billion above the fiscal year 2017 bill which we recently passed. Its a strong investment in the security of our nation, our families, neighbors, schools and businesses. Critical resources are directed to customs and Border Protection<\/a> to improve infrastructure and technology and put boots on the ground. This includes 1. 6 billion for physical barrier construction along the southern border and 100 million to hire 500 new Border Patrol<\/a> agents. The bill also provides 7 billion for immigration and Customs Enforcement<\/a> to ensure our laws are being followed. This includes funding for additional Law Enforcement<\/a> officers, detention and removal programs, investigation programs that fight Human Trafficking<\/a>. Drug smuggling and cyber crime. This complements a lot of what the recent commerce, justice and state bill did passed that we recently passed. Protect our coasts and stem the flow of illegal goods into and out of the country. The bill provides 10. 5 billion in funding for the coast guard. This legislation addresses other 21st century threats to our nation as well, namely securing our Cyber Infrastructure<\/a> against dangerous hacking and cyberattacks. Investments into the National Protection<\/a> and programs directorate will enhance that. It ensures our nation is ready and able to respond to any emergencies or Natural Disaster<\/a>s by fully funding femas Disaster Relief<\/a> account. In addition, 2. 7 billion is provided for fema Grant Programs<\/a> that support our First Responders<\/a>. The first line of defense in our communities. I would like to thank the subcommittee chair and ranking as well as all members and, may i say, the Remarkable Group<\/a> of men and women behind us who make us look good and have worked on a very expeditious basis to bring this bill forward today. I urge support of this bill and its my pleasure to recognize miss lowie for any comments she may have. Thank you, chairman. I want to thank chairman carter and Ranking Member<\/a> Roybal Allard<\/a> and the staffs on both sides of the aisle and all the members of the subcommittee for the important work that you have done. With the procedural roadblocks hindering our path forward, specifically no bipartisan budget agreement, one might think the majority would produce bills that could possibly gain support from democrats. Yet, that has not happened. The bill before us today provides some minority input on funding, including the restoration of proposed cuts to fema grants, which are of vital importance to my home state of new york, and is the chairman was receptive to many of the minorities requests for report language to add a collegial process which we appreciate. However, this bill unacceptably provides significant increases to carry out the administrations draconian Immigration Enforcement<\/a> that will target noncriminal immigrants and separate families while underfunding other dhs priorities. As a result, the subcommittees allocation is 1. 9 billion. 1. 9 billion over the current level. And nearly 250 million more than president trumps request. While other bills have been severely slashed, this bill would waste 1. 6 billion on the president s boondoggle of a wall along the u. S. Mexican Border<\/a> and more than 700 million on thousands of new detention beds and i. C. E. Enforcement officers. Instead of building walls, we should build bridges to advancement by investing in research through the science and Technology Directorate<\/a> to help build the departments technology and equipment gaps, not cut it by 87 million. We should help protect our airports by increasing funding for the tsas Law Enforcement<\/a> officer reimbursement program, not eliminating it. Security at airports is a shared responsibility, and this is no time for the federal government to start pulling back on its commitments. Shooting incidents like the one at the ft. Lauderdale airport in january are a tragic reminder that we cannot afford to relax our Airport Security<\/a> posture. Or instead of fulfilling Donald Trumps<\/a> 1. 6 billion concrete monument to a campaign promise, we can increase funds in other appropriation bills to give more hardworking americans a fair shake by helping them create jobs in their Small Businesses<\/a>, protecting pell grants or building safer, faster Transportation Systems<\/a> or upgrading crumbling infrastructure, and the list goes on and on. Democrats are eager to support bills that include appropriate spending levels and are free from misguided, politically driven policies. The sooner we can begin to do that, the sooner we can begin to enact bills that make the investments our communities truly need. Thank you, mr. Chairman, and i look forward to working together to make sure that at the end we have products that we can all be proud of. Thank you. Thank you, miss lowey. Any further discussion on the bill . Yes. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, as the first chairman of this subcommittee and first six years of his life, this this department is important to me personally. And i want to congratulate the chairman and the subcommittee for doing a good job this year. This is a tough, tough bill. Very few bills that we have are as complicated as Homeland Security<\/a>. When we created the subcommittee after the department was created, 15 years ago, we were trying to merge together 22 different federal agencies. As varied as the secret service, tsa, the coast guard, cbp, and on and on and on. They were like dozens of pay scales within those formerly separate offices, 13 different unions, and the like, a network of trying to amalgammate all of these single agencies in a single efficient one still goes on. We are not there yet. These agencies are not amalgammated as they perhaps were dreamt could be done. I am not sure you ever can. Amalgamate the coast guard with secret service, for example, or tsa, or cbp, and so forth. Nevertheless, this bill goes a long way toward achieving that goal. Judge, i want to congratulate you and your staff for putting this together. When you think about the breadth of the responsibility of Aviation Security<\/a>, border and Immigration Enforcement<\/a>. Customs activities, cyber terrorism, Natural Disaster<\/a> response, smuggling of drugs and people into the u. S. , Disaster Relief<\/a>. Emergency response activities through fema and the like, this is a complicated, important, vital piece of the nations defense. And mr. Chairman, as the first chairman of this subcommittee and of a subcommittee that near and dear to my heart, thank you for a good job. Thank you, chairman rogers. Mr. Cuellar. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I also want to thank judge carter and miss Roybal Allard<\/a> for the work. Its a very difficult trying to find this balance. I have to say that i know this is a process, and were going to keep doing this as miss lowey said to move the process. At the end, when we get a final bill, were hoping we can all find consensus. In particular, judge carter, you know i dont like the wall. Its a 14th century solution. I think i am the only member who lives at the border. I live there, drink the water and understand that very well. I understand this is a process we disagree on. I want to mention three things that i think youve done and, miss Roybal Allard<\/a>, have done a good job. Let me mention the cbp, customs and Border Protection<\/a>, talking about bridges. One of the Biggest Challenges<\/a> that we have is the attrition rate that we have. In fact, we have found ways to speed up the hiring of cbp officers, but the attrition rate still outpaces the people that we are trying to hire. So as we are trying to put more of the people on the bridges or at the ports of entry where the airport the attrition rate is still large. We have to continue working on it. I know there is language there to try to make sure we hire good, qualified individuals. There is a hundred Million Dollars<\/a> for new nonintrusion inspection equipment. I know there is a proof of concept pilot at the world trade bridge in laredo where we have 14,000 trucks a day. That, again, is an emphasis that we have to look at. Most of the emphasis from a lot of members here is between the points of entry. I want to emphasize weve got to make sure that we dont forget the land ports of entry. Thats very important. I want to thank you, mr. Chairman, and the Ranking Member<\/a>, for that money. The other thing is the humanitarian relief. As you know, in 2014 we had a lot of folks that came in, so the border communities a lot of them are very poor communities went out and out of their pocket they went ahead and took care of a lot of the kids that came in. Actually, i was working with chairman rogers at that time and nita lowey, to put that language and i think weve had it for three years. I am hoping the state of texas, it looks like Governor Abbott<\/a> will go ahead and allow that money. But thats a fema reimbursement. Again, thats something that i just wanted to emphasize. Again, mr. Chairman and Ranking Member<\/a>, thank you so much for the efforts that youve done in this committee. Thank you, mr. Cuellar. Gentleman from pennsylvania. Mr. Dent. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I wanted to express support for the over the road bus security assistant Grant Programs<\/a> which was not specifically funded in the legislation last year, 2 million was allocated for this specific program. In light of the recent terror attacks abroad, which made use of Motor Vehicles<\/a> and ramming attacks against crowds, buildings and other vehicles, its especially important to consider further support for this program. In fy 17 there were over 22 million in grant requests for the appropriated amount of a few Million Dollars<\/a>. There was a demonstrated desire on the part of the operators to improve the security of the services to protect the traveling public. I hope we can find a way to support the program which helps protect our nations transportation infrastructure. In my district we send buses by the dozens every day into new york city. A lot of other folks, the port authority, were all run by private operators trying to make sure the motoring public is safe. Appreciate your consideration Going Forward<\/a>. Mr. Rupersberger. I agree with chairman rogers. Homeland security has way too Many Missions<\/a> and we have a long way to go. Chairman carter and Ranking Member<\/a> Roybal Allard<\/a> have done a great job of working with the committee. This is a bipartisan committee, to protect us. We are in a dangerous time. Some of the most serious threats our country has ever faced. Nuclear weapons probably the most serious. They have north korea. The iran threat, the russia china threat. It goes on. One of the most serious threats we have are the cyberattacks. It can affect our homeland seriously. Not only is china stealing 2 billion a year. We have russia in our systems. Its a serious threat and we have a long way to go to deal with it. Cyber funding at dhs comes from defense dollars called 050 money. This subcommittee consistently receives a low allocation of 050 money. Last year there was a gap of over 500 million in what Homeland Security<\/a> needed and received. This money goes to promoting our country related to cyberattacks, this year, thanks to the chairman Ranking Member<\/a>, the gap is only 28 million, thats a good start. We thank you for closing that gap, both of you. And staff too. There are two sides to the Cyber Mission<\/a> at the department of Homeland Security<\/a>. One being operational. That protects the networks and with the private sector. It should be known that 80 of the network is controlled by the private sector, so we must work in a partnership. The other, we are also, as we know, are competing with russia, china, north korea and many others, and we have to stay ahead of that curve. They are in our systems and they are attacking us on a regular basis. The only destructive attack so far was the sony attack. We are drastically cutting the important Cyber Security<\/a> and research and Development Work<\/a> and shifting that money to fund a border wall. Thats what causes so much problem between democrats and republicans, that border wall issue. The president made a promise, a border wall, but i explicitly remember him saying, mexico would pay for it. Not saying he would gut the Important Research<\/a> and Development Work<\/a> at the department of Homeland Security<\/a> to fund it. We have to realize the Cyber Security<\/a> threat to our nation and its citizens before we have a crisis on our hands. The threats and protection of our Networks Must<\/a> remain a priority at department of Homeland Security<\/a> and this committee. I look forward to working with the chairman, Ranking Member<\/a> and the Committee Members<\/a> to close the 050 funding gap even further in future bills. Mr. Price. Mr. Chairman. As a longtime member and onetime chairman of this subcommittee, i want to first thank the chairman, mr. Carter, Ranking Member<\/a> Roybal Allard<\/a>, for the collaborative process that theyve ex plem plified with this bill. You have both been receptive and subcommittee member concerns. I appreciate your ability to work in a bipartisan manner. In particular, the bill does reflect minority input, including a rejection of the budget requests misguided elimination of the National Bioscience<\/a> integration center. I am grateful for that. However, the bill does provide significant funding increases for Immigration Enforcement<\/a> and border infrastructure that i believe go far beyond whats needed or what can be efficiently expended in one year. The additions come at a time when Border Apprehensions<\/a> have actually declined. And when i. C. E. And cbp are operating at already high levels of funding. The majority is appropriated more than 1. 6 billion for 75 miles of new border wall in this bill. People wouldnt know it from the president s alarmist rhetoric, but there are already over 700 miles of pedestrian and vehicular fencing on our nations southern border. I know this firsthand since the majority of the fencing was built when i was chairman of this subcommittee. During that time, congress appropriated funds to build cha this subcommittee. During that time, congress appropriated funds to build hundreds of miles of fencing. However, we did have some requirements. We required a segment by segment analysis. We required alternative analysis of the best way to secure the border. We required study was Environmental Impact<\/a> and a number of required fence locations for new fencing was placed. This bill doesnt include language regarding congressional oversight before wall construction including fiscal 18 funds. There are no requirements for dhs to submit cost benefit analysis or to work with congress through any modifications. I dont believe funding an unnecessary wall, especially one without appropriate congressional oversight will make us good stewards of taxpayer dollars. We simply become complicit in campaign demagoguery. In that connection, this bill makes clear that the majority intends the American People<\/a> to foot the bill on a border wall, not mexico as the president has so often foolishly claimed. This 1. 6 billion could be spent on much more important priorities that actually would improve the lives of our citizens and the security of our country, and i look forward to the Ranking Member<\/a>s proposal to do just that. Thank you. Any further discussion . Mr. Cartwright is recognized. Thank you, chairman. I want to thank the chairman, judge carter, Ranking Member<\/a> roy allard, and all of the subcommittee and the staff for the work that you put into this bill, an enormous amount of labor went into it, obviously. While this markup will likely touch on quite a number of controversial issues, i want to pause first and highlight an area where the majority and the minority did come together to help ordinary americans, both the homeland bill and the interior bill include language encouraging customs and Border Protection<\/a> and fish and wild life to cooperate on streamlining the permit process for trade goods covered by environmental regulations. This language also prompts the agencies to bring the process online, making it simpler and easier for businesses to comply. These changes will help hardworking, Small Businesses<\/a> like my constituent, martin guitar in nazareth, pennsylvania, conformed to important environmental regulations by reducing Compliance Costs<\/a> across the board. I want to thank the subcommittee that are working together to make it possible. I do hope it sets the tone for further bipartisan cooperation moving forward through the appropriations process. Thank you. Any further discussion . Mr. Syriano. Verano. Thank you. Hello . I know my seat changed, but i didnt know my name had changed, too. By the way, if you want to know why im sitting here, dont ask me. Ask the chairman. He put me here today. And im glad to be here. I just want to talk very briefly about the wall. Its such a waste of money. You know, people who want to get into this country as badly as they do, no wall will stop them. Theyll find a way get here and while i understand that we have a border immigration issue, and notice i call it an issue. I dont call it a problem because any time you have the greatest country on earth still invite people by its behavior, but its democratic form of government, by its economy, by its way of living, still invites people to come here, thats a good thing. Does it mean that we have to have it under control . No. Does it mean we cant adjust some things . No, we should. We should never feel bad about it. Its not a terrible thing. Those people are coming here. The same way that those other people came here years and years and years before us, and in one way or another, very few of us are not immigrants or come from an immigrant family or greatgrandparents or grandparents or whatever, and so when i hear us always talk about the wall, i keep this image in my mind. My city, new york harbor with the majestic statue of liberty that says give me people. Give me those that hurt. Give me those that are hungry. Give me those that are poor. Give me those that need help, and then a wall on the south that says keep those out, theres something wrong with that, and its not about who we are upon so when you think about this wall and you take the first steps and i was with chairman rogers on that committee on the Homeland Security<\/a> committee when it was first formed, and i remember that we were signing to do wonderful things and the building of a fence came into play and it ruined the whole discussion in the committee. As you think about it, just dont Pay Attention<\/a> to the fact that already promises have been broken. I mean, mexico was to pay for it. Who really believed that . You see it in this bill. Were going to pay for it, but if the symbol, the message it sends to the world, the message it sends to ourselves as a people, we, the United States<\/a> of america, the greatest country on earth, the one whose military uniform i was proud to serve in a very lowly rank, but proud so serve, this country should never build a wall to keep people out. Should it deal with an immigration issue . Yes, but never, ever, ever build a wall. On the contrary, build another statue of liberty on the southern border. Thats our message to the world, that statue, not the wall. And again, the wall would cost billions of dollars and it is a waste of money. It will divide us, it will divide our country, our rhetoric and our comments and thats what well become. So i ask you please, in closing, when you think about Going Forward<\/a> with the next steps to building this wall, think about what it means for our country that we, instead of saying, yes, we know you want to come here because were the greatest country on earth. Lets talk about howio get here. Instead, we build a wall and say stay out. We dont want you. Thats not who we are and thats not who we should become. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Further discussion hearing none, we turn to mr. Chairman, mr. Carter for the managers amendment. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I offer this bipartisan measure. The clerk will read. An amendment offered by mr. Carter. Its unanimous consent. You are recognized to present your amendment. The amendment is bipartisan. It includes several noncontroversial comments that several of the members of the committee, unless there are various questions i urge to adopt the amendment. I support the amendment. Mr. Rupert . Thank you, mr. Chairman. First, i stand in support of the managers amendment at the desk. I want to thank the Ranking Member<\/a> that places a stay on the closure of three science and technology labs. The labs are the following. The National Defense<\/a> analysis and biomeasure center at fort detrick. Chemical security analysis center, probing grounds and the National Urban<\/a> Security Laboratory<\/a> in manhattan. They are critical, with chemicals i understand the administration has outlined their priorities, its our role to fight for the essential program and the National Counter<\/a> measure Center Provides<\/a> Law Enforcement<\/a> with forensic analysis such as anthrax, ricin and ebola. The Chemical Security Analysis Center<\/a> is the only 24hour, seven days a week center reached by capability. They provide First Responders<\/a> with immediate guidance and actual instructions to mitigate the damaged chemical threats. The last National Urban<\/a> security lab with the security of the city centers and usually advanced modeling they were able to counter and mitigate terrorist attacks in densely populated area like new york, new jersey, whatever. These labs are essential to maintaining the security of our homeland. Moving forward we can fully fund these centers. Witness again, i not the value of the lab. Judge carter to close. Mr. Chairman . Mr. Pokann and miss quigley, commit. I would lick to think that Ranking Member<\/a> and your staffs, specifically looking at report under Critical Infrastructure<\/a>. We know that one of the companies that makes Voting Machines<\/a> in the states there were attempts to hack in the last elections and by doing that Critical Infrastructure<\/a> is the same as what we do with the Financial Services<\/a> to provide the greatest protection and i appreciate having that report language in the managers amendment. Mr. Quigley is recognized. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to thank the Ranking Member<\/a> for the language in the amendment that would have dha and dhs advise the committee on how we could better address the threat on the soft targets in ways to sd ways ways to secure these targets. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chair. I rise, too, in support of the managers amendment and i support the chair including Ranking Member<\/a> including one of my priority which is you may be surprise side in this bill and thats related to organic imports. You have heard about organic fraud in imported food. Organics is nearly a 50 billion, which is why theyre so troubling to me and to others who care about this issue. Its not fair to consumers who expect that when they buy something labeled organic to find out its not. Its not fair to the farmers who often have to use more expensive inputs or labor to produce the products and part of the problem is that we dont have sufficient tracking of imports which makes it impossible to be the total quantity and origin of imported organic products. We also have a shortage in the country of organic commodities and we are not able to track how much were bringing in to understand how much more we could be bringing into the United States<\/a>. There is language that urges u. S. Customs and Border Patrol<\/a> to add questions to the automated environment or ace which is the transport system that are certified organic. So i thank the chair and Ranking Member<\/a>. I rise in support of the managers amendment for adding language to continue to move in the direction to making sure that the airport across the country are working toward developing better interoperability, as well as integrated Airport Operation<\/a> centers. Im sure you remember in january when Fort Lauderdale<\/a> Hollywood International<\/a> airport had a shooter that had checked a firearm in their bag and came off and opened fire in the baggage claim area killing five people and wounding 13 others. One of the items theyve been looking at and the have been examining and dealing with the public Area Security<\/a> is making sure that there is a better coordination across our country and interoperability and there is language in the bill that encourages that. Any further discussion of the amendment. Questions on the managers amendment . All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed say nay. Ranking member . Mr. Chairman, i have an amendment at the doefk. Clerk will read. An amendment offered by consider it read, the gentlewoman is recognized. My amendment would increase for the polar ice Breaker Program<\/a> by their 13. Says the border introis structure and i. C. E. Interior. As i noted in my Opening Statement<\/a> to pose increases for i. C. E. Hiring and detention beds are not well justified and do want have a security focus. In contrast, the need for heavy i. C. E. Breakers is well documented. A draft report from the National Academy<\/a> of sciences released just last week warned and i quote, United States<\/a> has insufficient assets to protect its interests, implement u. S. Policy, execute its laws and meet its obligations in the arctic and antarctic because it lacks adequate ice breaking capability, end quote. Mr. Chairman, this is because currently the coast guard only has one functioning ice breaker, the polar star built in 1976 which is well past its 30year expected operational life. It no longer has the reliability we need and the cost to maintain it will continue to rise. At this point its primary mission is to clear a path through the ice through our Research Facilities<\/a> in antarctica. This means we have no heavy ice breaking asset in the arctic unlike other countries like russia. The polish star is expected to continue functioning for just three to seven years, leaving the United States<\/a> with no heavy ice breaking capability. We are dangerously falling behind. Russia has 41 ice breakers that are active or under construction, four of which are heavy ice breakers. This puts the United States<\/a> at a tremendous disadvantage since we are unable to operate in parts of the arctic ocean for months at a time. The National Academy<\/a>s report goes on to rec mend that, and i quote, the United States<\/a> congress should fund the construction of four polar ice breakers of common design that will be owned and operated by the United States<\/a> coast guard, end quote. The fy defense funding bill included 150 million for the coast guardheavy ice breaker as a down payment on what is expected to be nearly a 1 billion price tag for the first ship, but the ndaa includes a provision prohibiting the pentagon from using fy18 funds to acquire an ice brauker for the coast guard. An amendment to strike the provision failed on a recorded vote. The solution is to fund the next installment of funds directly through the coast guard. While they sign an acquisition contract, it will have a proposal in midfy18 by providing 2. 3 billion this this bill, enough to cover the cost of two or maybe three heavy ice breakers, we can help the coast guard get a better price per ship. In fact, it is estimated that acquiring three ships at one time would save the government nearly 160 million per vessel according to the National Academy<\/a>s report. Just think what we could accomplish here today. With this one amendment we could puz the United States<\/a> on a path to securing the sovereign interest in the arctic region. We cannot afford to delay any further. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. Thank you, gentlewoman for your comments. Chairman carter . Thank you, mr. Chairman. I rise in opposition to my friend allard amendment. Cbp funding is essential to obtaining operational control to the border. Illegal migrants can exploit vulnerabilities in the nations border and so can terrorists, human smugglers and traffickers. This is unacceptable. Operational control requires the ability to detect, identify and prevent illegal crossings of the border enabling Law Enforcement<\/a> to respond to illegal activity and the appropriately trained and equipped Border Patrol<\/a> that could conduct their mission successfully, cutting funding from cbp would leave our border open and threaten our National Security<\/a>. Physical barriers on the border work and are necessary as evidenced by the dramatic decline in apprehensions with the security infrastructure was put in place and installed in the san diego and arizona area. That illicit traffic has shifted to the Rio Grande Valley<\/a> and im committed to bring the same security to texas. The proposal to cut i. C. E. Funding for enforcement of Immigration Law<\/a>s and remove those here illegally. We are not only in danger. The safety of the American People<\/a> who will also convey to the bad actors that the rule of law no longer exists in the United States<\/a> leading to increased border crossings and going the overall alien population of the United States<\/a>. Cutting for funding would laes to the release of criminals and other removal aliens into communities across the country and we give the United States<\/a> border security. Additional i. C. E. Agents will reduce crime and vigorous immigration and custom laws. It compromises i. C. E. s mission jeopardizing public policy. It cannot be separated from border security. A successful Border Control<\/a> and immigration system must be supported by enforcement of all pertinent laws. Adding funds to have a polar ice breaker, while a noble idea, and one i support, no doubt about it, but its simply not practical at this time. The coast guard is still in the nascent stage of design and will not be ready to procure the first ice breaker until fy2019 at the earliest. Funds will be unexecutable, and therefore, a waste of time and a waste of limited resources we have. I ask you to join me in opposing this amendment. Thank you, judge carter. The chair recognizes the comment on the gentlewomans amendment. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I rise in strong support of the amendment. The coast guard fiercely defends our waters and borders everywhere from San Francisco<\/a> to new york, to alaska and the polar region. Russia simply has us beat when it comes to ice cutting vastly outperforming us on the construction of ice breakers and maintaining a significant presence in the polar region. Our antiquated ice Cutting Technology<\/a> is out of the water half of the time due to maintenance, leaving russia and china plenty of sea to explore without american deterrence. This is exactly the type of investment we should be focused on. It advances American Foreign<\/a> policy, keeps the homeland safe, puts americans to work and their need is well overdue, instead of making this investment the majority has chosen to spend billions of dollars on a border wall and implement draconian immigration policies. Lets stop fulfilling empty Campaign Promises<\/a> and focus on where the Real Investment<\/a> is needed. Vote for the amendment. Thank you, miss louie. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I rise in strong support of this amendment. This amendment fulfills the committees responsibility to make sure that our resources are allocated in a responsible matter that keeps our country safe and upholds our values. We heard earlier in the discussion that we are all for secure borders. We need to do it in a commonsense way, a way that not only protects, you know, criminal elements from entering our country, but also welcomes immigrants and people who want to enter legally. We are putting up a wall thats telling the world that we dont want anyone to join us here in the United States<\/a> to live in hope and prosperity. As we continue this debate, however, on National Security<\/a>, i want to be clear. Russia has taken full advantage of the changing arctic environment. Today russia has 40 ice breakers and theyre building more. The score is russia, 40. U. S. , 2. They are needed with the arctic melt and commercial fishing and commercial tourism moving forward, and we have a responsibility to protect alaskas border, too. So i strongly support this amendment. This amendment does exactly what it needs to do and it represents misplaced funding on a border wall and puts it in a pressing need of national interest. I yield back. Mr. Chairman, i rise in support of the ranking statement, indicated the need to eblgs pabd its ice breaking capacity ideally requiring a fleet of six ice breakers, three heavy and three medium to meet mission demands. We need to protect our National Security<\/a> and economic interest and we have the capability and we need to provide safe passage as we counter russian aggression. Unfortunately, the coast guards ice breaker inventory has reached the end of the service life and we desperately need these construction funds. Ordinarily in this committee we turn to the pay for and we have to struggle, but want in this case. Not in this case. The Ranking Member<\/a> has a pay that strengthens the bill, improves the bill because she is removing funding for an unnecessary and harmful border wall and shes also taking some funds from the increases for i. C. E. Enforcement and not, mind you, the core capacity of i. C. E. , but the excessive i. C. E. Hiring that is anticipated in this bill and the unneeded detention beds. So the pay actually strengthens the bill and the amendment itself addresses a critical, National Security<\/a> need. I yield back. A minute to close. Mr. Chairman, i just want to repeat that the National Companies<\/a> of science have said that the United States<\/a> has insufficient assets to protect its interests, and that it is estimated that acquiring three ships at one time would save the government nearly 160 million per vessel. I urge my colleagues to vote for this amendment. Thank you for your comments. Questions on the gentlewomans comment, all those in favor say aye. Aye. The clerk will call the roll. Mr. Aguilar, aye. No. Mr. Bishop. Mr. Bishop, aye. Mr. Calvert. Calvert, no. Mr. Cartwright . Aye. Mr. Cartwright, aye. Miss clark, a. Mr. Cole, no. Mr. Cuellar, aye. Miss deloro. Aye. Mr. Dent, no. Mr. Diaz balart, no. Mr. Fleischmann . No. Mr. Freelinghighsen, no. Miss granger, no. Mr. Graves, no. Dr. Harris . No. Miss herrerabutler. No. Mr. Jenkins, no. Mr. Joyce. Mr. Joyce, no, miss captor. Miss captor, aye. Mr. Killmer, aye. Miss lee, aye. Mrs. Loi, aye. Miss mccollum. Mr. Mol far, no. Mr. Palazzo, no. Mr. Palazzo, snow. Miss pingry, aye. Mr. Pokann aye. Mr. Quigley. Mr. Quigley . Mrs. Roby . Mrs. Roby, no. Mr. Rogers. Mr. Rogers, no. Mr. Rooney . Mr. Rooney . Miss allard. Mr. Rupisberger, aye. Mr. Serrano, aye. Mr. Simpson . Mr. Simpson, no. Mr. Stewart. Mr. Stewart, no. Mr. Taylor, no. Mr. Valdeo. Mr. Viskcluskey. Ms. Wasserman schulz, no. Mr. Yoder, no. Mr. Young. Mr. Young, no. Are there any members who wish to record the vote change . Mr. Quigley . Mr. Quigley recorded aye. Mr. Rooney, you are recognized. Mr. Rooney recorded no. Any further members . If not, the clerk will tally. [inaudible] on this vote the yeas are 22, the nays are 30. The amendment is not agreed to. Further amendments . Mr. Aderholt is recognized. The clerk will read. An amendment by, and consider it read. The gentleman is read for five minutes. I read off an amendment and urged by colleagues to support it. This amendment is not new. It basically is one that has been passed the last several years in this committee. The purpose of the language is to simply codify the policy that i. C. E. Already follows. It is not codified in statute. This deals with abortion limitation and so that dealing with anyone that is detained by i. C. E. Would not be would not be paid, an abortion would be paid for by the federal government. The cgs bill has the same, exact language, and it covers the the federal bureau of prisons, and this language has been carried many times by both democrats and republicans, and again, this is not really new language. It just simply codifies what i. C. E. Already follows and thats when we need to have it just because of the lack of not being codified. Thank you. Chairman carter . I thank you, mr. Chairman. I rise in support of this amendment and that amendment does nothing more than codify current i. C. E. Policy. Policy i. C. E. Has followed since its creation and that its predecessor and the immigration and Naturalization Service<\/a> followed for years. Respectfully, i asked for the adoption of this amendment and i yield back. Miss allard is recognized. I rise in strong opposition. It has become a perennial exercise. There is already a governmentwide prohibition on federal funds abortion proceedures and the restrictions are specifically formalized in part 4. 4 of isis 2011 detention standards. There are many urgent Homeland Security<\/a> matters actually facing the department and this country. We simply dont need the distraction of this amendment which is a solution in search of a problem. I urge my colleagues to oppose it. Ms. Wasserman schultz. I rise in strong opposition to this amendment. This ideologically driven rider from the majority is introduced year after year. It is particularly troubling on a Homeland Security<\/a> spending bill. If we keep weighing down this bill with partisan riders, we do it at the detriment of First Responders<\/a>. Terrorism prevention and the safety of our communities, and most of us in this room have met with our First Responders<\/a>, i. C. E. Agents, Border Patrol<\/a> and other hardworking security personnel. Frankly, my friend, at no point have any of them said to me that womans reproductive rights makes their job more difficult. Not one, with the serious threats facing us today is restricting womens Reproductive Health<\/a> really a Homeland Security<\/a> priority in this congress . Lets do the right thing and oppose this misguided amendment. Ms. Wasserman schulz. I rise in strong opposition to this amendment and here we are once again going through yet another unsafe and unjustifiable amendment regarding a woman to make her own Health Care Decisions<\/a>. Once again, this amendment is unnecessary because as my colleagues know full well, current i. C. E. Policy guidelines may receive abortion care only in cases of life endangerment, rape or insist. Once again, it is an attempt to deny care for women already facing overwhelming circumstances and this amendment is a painful reminder of how year after year, they so callously disregard the plight of the women held in immigration detention on any given day. This is especially cruel in light of the fact that human rights advocates, to be between 60 and 80 . Once again, the amendment is currently unjustifiable, because restricting safe medical procedures is unjustifiable. It is unsafe because the safest medical decisions are always made between a woman, her family, her faith and her doctor. I dont know how i could make this more clear. Women deserve the right to make their decisions about their body and their health and notice i did not say with the guidance of their member of guidance. I urge that women trust to know whats best for our own bodies and to vote no on this unjustifiable amendment. Mr. Chairman, i rise in strong support of this amendment. Im the father of six children, and i think all of us remember the day that we hold our first child and your life is forever changed after that, and i feel the same way about my grandchildren now. I just think this is one of those times when its important that we stand up for those who cannot stand up for themselves. This is more than anything its not a political issue. Its not a legal issue. This is a moral issue to me that i think we have the responsibility. As he stated this amendment is not repetitive and its simply consistent with the current law and its a standard thats been carried for more than 20 years. I understand that there are exceptions and that a Womans Health<\/a> is just as important as the childs and again, the amendment includes it, which provides for exceptions for rape and for incest. I encourage my fellow colleagues to defend innocent lives. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Of course, i rise in strong opposition to this proposed writer, as i have year after year after year. Its inappropriate and purely based in ideology. Its shameful that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are introducing language to this bill that further allows politicians to interfere with a womans personal Health Care Decisions<\/a> just because of who she is. This language prevents immigrant women in custody from making the best Health Care Decisions<\/a> for herself and her family. Elected officials should not be playing politics with womens access to health care. Period. Its wrong and misguided. Its cruel and an immoral attack on the ability of immigrant women in their most vulnerable moments, although this harmful amendment provides in the case of rape and incest and a narrow definition of life endangerment. It would still allow nonmedical personnel such as Detention Center<\/a> employees with no medical training to block access to lifesaving care and information for women. Lets be clear. This amendment poses a direct threat to women in detention certains. Once again, politics is being put before Womens Health<\/a> and inserting it into decisions that should be made by a woman and her healthcare professional. This is irresponsible and has no place in this bill. Yes, as my colleagues said, the Hyde Amendment<\/a> is currently in law, that doesnt mean its right and that does not mean it does not discreme nate against certain women and personally, we should take hyde off the books also. Thank you. Thank the gentlewoman. I ask that the reading be suspended. Let me clarify this because i think theres some miscommunication. It basically, no federal funds should be used to pay for an abortion and there is an exception, the life of the mother would be in danger if the fetus were carried to term or in terms of rape or incest regarding i. C. E. Detainees. No federal funds should be used and i wanted to clairify that fr those. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All of those opposed say nay. The clerk will call the roll. [ roll call ] call] [ roll call ] [ roll call ] [ roll call ] [ roll call ] [ roll call ] [ roll call ] are there members who wish to record their vote . Miss captor . Miss captor recorded as no. Anyone further . Mr. Rooneys recognized. Aye for mr. Rooney. Mr. Rooney recorded as aye. Anyone further . Mr. Newhouse. The clerk will tally. [inaudible]. [inaudible] ps or this vote the yeas are 29, the nays are 21. The amendment is agreed to. Further amendments in miss reed is recognized. Clerk will read. An amendment offered by miss lee. At the end of the bill considered read, the gentlewoman is recognized. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. Let me thank our Ranking Member<\/a> and our chairman for including language that i requested to accelerate the completion of a Cybersecurity Strategy<\/a> and also for the customs and Border Control<\/a> to submit a report on the allocation of overtime resources. So thank you both for including this in the bill. I am offering this ashs mendment, but i will withdraw it, but i think i need to reflect upon what it would do and really look at our role in aiding and abetting this muslim ban. My amendment would prohibit 1380 the muslim ban 2. 0 signed into force on march 6, 2017, this executive order is better known as the muslim ban for replacing a broader ban designated in january 2017 by another executive order. As you may recall, this first ban created chaos at airports and kept thousands stranded as the customs and Border Control<\/a> and other Law Enforcement<\/a> officers struggled to really interpret the broad guidelines. Once the administration realized their first muslim ban would not stand up in court because of its unconstitutionality and hateful intent, quite frankly, they issued this retooled muslim ban in march 2017. Now this continues to significantly slash the number of refugees the United States<\/a> will admit and continues a broad ban on visitors from six majority muslim countries. Iran, libya, somalia, sudan, syria and yemen. And while the Supreme Court<\/a> allowed partial enforcement of the ban just last month, our nation should be deeply concerned by the administrations interpretation that we are closing doors to muslim refugees, and i am concerned because ive heard from many, many constituents and others that they and their families abroad are really quite afraid to travel. Its unacceptable. Thats why my amendment is so critical. It would prevent funds from being used to implement this very heartless executive order because it is just dangerous and its unamerican. This ban forced on refugees and loved ones, it does not make america any safer and it diverts resources away from the real threats and it weakens our leadership on the world stage. Contrary to claims in this executive order, none of the 9 11 hijackers would have been affected by this ban. According to the Cato Institute<\/a> which is a conservative think tank, as you know, not a Single Person<\/a> has been killed in the United States<\/a> by a terrorist attack committed by the countries under this ban. More than 100 bipartisan National Security<\/a> experts argue that this ban endangers americans more. The fact that the United States<\/a> has enacted a muslim ban is a propaganda victory for extremist groups like isis who are using it as a recruiting tool. More importantly, its a hateful, unjust ban and it really does tack a wrecking ball to the statue of liberty. Halting refugees and six predominantly muslim nations is prejudice and islamophobia. This is not who we are as a nation. We are a nation of immigrants who have come together to form a more perfect union. Congress should not allow the president to turn us back and discriminate against people based on their religion. I know the argument that we will hear here that this the issue is being litigated in the courts, and the congress shouldnt meddle, but ill tell you one thing, we as appropriators and as americans really have a duty as members of this committee to continue to do the work to reflect upon our American Values<\/a> and that is to ban the and use our resources to further address our National Security<\/a> in ways that are reflective of the american way. Thank you, miss lee. Chairman carter . I rise in opposition to this amendment. The executive order protecting the nation from foreign terror and theyre valid and exercise, under the president s authority under section 212f of the immigration nationality act, and of the president s inherent powers over foreign policy. The majority of the provisions were not challenged in court. Thus, this amendment is overly broad. Those who were challenged were held to be in the president s authority or are still being litigated before the Supreme Court<\/a>. For these reasons i oppose this amendment and ask others to vote no. Yield back. Do you plan to withdraw the amendment . Anyone further on the amendment . Miss lee . I do plan to withdraw the amendment, but i would just encourage members of this committee to really understand what is taking place in terms of these executive orders and in the future, we need to debate this more fully in this committee in terms of what we want to allocate and appropriate our resources. Thank you for withdrawing the amendment. Further amendments, mr. Pokeann is recognized. I have pokann number one. The clerk will read. Considered read, please proceed. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to thank miss lee for her amendment and she talked about the muslim ban, but this, specifically, is a very narrow approach regarding the decision around familiar familial relationships and i would hope we might be able to recognize the familial relationships like grandparents and grandchildren. Just listening to my colleague, mr. Stewart talking about holding his grandchild, thats a common feeling that people have, that theres a close relationship and under the current language under the Trump Administration<\/a>, those grandparents wouldnt be considered as close, family relationships. The bonified relationship that came to the Supreme Court<\/a> decision on its preliminary ruling on the muslim ban. The Trump Administration<\/a> made an arbitrary list of relationships that werent an exception from the ban and this list included a small number of family relationships while continuing to ban grandparents and People Living<\/a> in the United States<\/a>. The justification that the Trump Administration<\/a> used that essentially considers the bonified Family Member<\/a>s and doesnt consider grandparents. Stepsiblings count, but not nieces and nephews, parentinlaws are covered, but not cousins. This arbitrary determination leaves people facing arbitrary rules that devalue family relationships. One of our colleagues, the person who i took her seat in Congress Tammy Baldwin<\/a> who now serves in the senate was raised by her grandparents and that relationship is as close as any relationship that she has and thats true for so many people and under the current ruling and under the Trump Administration<\/a> they dont count, and it doesnt make sense and i think we have the opportunity to at least broaden that relationship to match what the courts in hawaii have decided that the u. S. District court, derek watson and i would hope that this is something that we can support in this amendment. Mr. Pokann, gentleman carter . Thank you, mr. Chairman, i rise in opposition to the amendment. My opposition is the same talking points that i just used for miss lee so ill save time and not say them over again. Okay. Ms. Allard. I rise in support of the pokann amendment. When the Supreme Court<\/a> allowed the administration to go ahead with its flawed travel plan. The administration took a narrow view as who counted as close relatives. Grandparents did not count, neither did grandchildren, uncles, aunts, nephew, nieces and cousins. A District Court<\/a> as mr. Pokann said stated they should be counted as close relatives. This amendment would do just that and i urge my colleagues to support the amendment. President trump Wasserman Schultz<\/a> is recognized. I rise in support of the pokan amendment. One of the great etch treasures that we have in life and something that unites all of humanity is our desire to be with our close family and the reason for visiting these challenges, i know each and every one of us worked on a constituent case related to the goal of allowing a close Family Member<\/a> of the constituent to immigrate to the United States<\/a>. I strongly support thatlaws and other close relatives can visit their u. S. Relatives. President trumps temporary ban on travelers and refugees from six predominantly muslim countries should not stand in the way of grandparents and other close relatives and other residents from entering the United States<\/a>. The judge ruled whatever from a large family knows, grand parent, sisters in law, nieces, uncles, and cousins are relevant relationships and should be allowed to visit. The state department issued that yesterday, despite the confusion around the muslim ban has been rampant and Congress Must<\/a> make clear thats our job that the recent rulings carry the force of law. Its especially crucial given that the administration has presented no National Security<\/a> basis from barring the close family rerelationships from entering the u. S. , and this muslim ban does nothing to make us safer. On the contrary it makes us less so by diverting resources from legitimate threats and we are still at a stifling worthwhile, exchanges and for all these reasons i rise in strong support. A minute to close. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I know we often talk about family values in this town and i think if we want to respect family values this is an opportunity, grandparents and grandchildren are part and parcel of family values. In our debate half an hour ago that was part of the conversation and i would hope to honor close family relationships. I yield back. Questions on the. Okann amendment. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed, nay. The nays have it. The clerk will call the roll. [ roll call ] [roll [ roll call ] [ roll call ] [ roll call ] [ roll call prep [ [roll call] [ roll call ] [ roll call ] are there members who wish to record their vote . Mr. Cuellar. Mr. Cuellar recorded aye. Mr. Joyce . No. Mr. Joyce recorded no. Anyone want to change their vote . Seeing or hearing, the clerk will tally. [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] , spoke, on this vote the yeas are 23. The nays are 29, the amendment is not agreed to. Mr. Serrano is recognized. For an amendment. Mr. Chairman, i raise to offer an amendment. I ask the reading be waived. Consider it done. The gentleman is recognized for five minutes. Thank you. This amendment would reduce the harm caused by the administration increase and the Immigration Enforcement<\/a> efforts. It would protect children and families by damaging sprazs by preventing ice from removing parents of citizen children absent some serious criminality on the part of that parent. Let me repeat that again. The parent is a criminal determined by the court. This does not apply. This is a serious problem according to a 2015 report, more than 500,000 parents of u. S. Citizen children were deported between 2009 and 2013. The two options available for citizen children in these circumstances are harsh. First, if a child chooses to remain in the United States<\/a>, then they can lose contact with their parents and often come to rely on the Child Welfare<\/a> state. Its a significant cost to state and local governments. And second, if a citizen child decides to remain with their deported papers then they are de facto deported to a country they are likely unfamiliar with and forced to abandon their country, the United States<\/a>, and by the way, im not a lawyer, but i would ask those of you who are, i wonder if its constitutional in a case like this to deport an american citizen and thats what you would be doing with a child. It is a loselose situation. Our immigration policy does not promote family separation. They should be promoting family unity. Unfortunately, as with much of our immigration policy under this administration and others, these types of tragic circumstances are likely to rise unless we take action and in the absence of comprehensive immigration reform, you are left with the appropriations process as the only vehicle to introduce some reasonableness into the immigration system. That is why im offering this amendment here today. We should prioritize our childrens best interest over the mass deportation axe jenda, separating children and parents is no idea of a good, immigration policy. This is our chance to stop the senseless policies that are against everything we stand for in the country. I urge support. Mr. Serrano. Chairman carter . I rise in opposition to this agreement. The dhaaca program was created the Obama Administration<\/a> with the Immigration Law<\/a> and policy. The amendment would eighth rise the main element of the daca program which is currently under injunction until the spark rehears the case. Further, any provision regarding the immigration status of aliens who are here illegally is an issue for the House Judiciary Committee<\/a> and therefore i oppose this amendment and ask that you vote against it. Mr. Chairman, i rise in strong support of the serrano amendment. When it comes to children who are citizens of this country, we should be putting their needs first, particularly if their parents have not committed serious crimes and do not pose a threat to others. During the last half of 2016, dhs removed 14,161 people who are parents of a United States<\/a> citizen minor. In los angeles, where im from, 424 were removed. In new york city, 95 were removed. In houston, 369. El paso, 128. Chicago, 241. Atlanta, 418. And the list goes on. Each one represents a family torn apart and at least one u. S. Child faced with either leaving their homeland to be with their parent or facing a life without that parent. I urge the adoption of this amendment. Thank the gentlewoman for her comments. A minute to close, mr. Serrano . Right. As i said before, i think the important point to keep in mind is that were not talking about giving a free pass to a criminal. Any parent who has committed a crime, serious enough for the court to consider serious would not be covered under this ruling. What im trying to do is say that a child who was born here, is an american citizen, should not be deported. In many cases the child gets deported or the child gets left behind to become a ward of the state, because theres no one to take care of them. Theres not necessarily a family to take care of them. Its a unique situation, a difficult situation. But i think this is a simple solution to it. No child born in this country can have a parent who is found by the courts not to have committed a serious crime deported for any reason. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Questions on the gentleman from new yorks amendment. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. All those opposed say nay. Nay. Opinion, the chair of the nays have it. Sufficient hands. Clerk will call the roll. Mr. Aderholt no. Mr. Aguilar, aye. Mr. Amaday . Mr. Bishop . Mr. Bishop, aye. Mr. Calvert . Mr. Carter . No. Mr. Carter, no. Mr. Cartwright . Aye. Miss clark aye. Mr. Cole, no. Mr. Cuear. No. Mr. Culberson . No. Mr. Dent . Mr. Dent no. Mr. Diaz ballard . No. Mr. Fleischman, no. Mr. Fortenberry, no. Mr. Friedlingheisen, no. Miss graves . Im sorry, mrs. Granger . Mrs. Granger, no. Mr. Graves . No. Dr. Harris . Dr. Harris, no. Miss herrerabutler . No. Mr. Jenkins . Mr. Jenkins, no. Mr. Joyce . Mr. Joyce, no. Miss captor . Aye. Mr. Kilmer . Mr. Kilmer, aye. Miss lee . Aye. Miss lee, aye. Mrs. Loey, aye. Miss mccollum . Aye. Miss ang. Aye mr. Molinar no. Mr. Newhouse . Mr. Newhouse, no. Mr. Palazzo . Mr. Palazzo . Miss pingree, aye. Mr. Pokane . Aye. Mr. Prierks aye. Mr. Quigly, aye. Mrs. Roby, no. Mr. Rogers, no. Mr. Rooney, no. Miss roy balladard, aye. Mr. Rupertsberger . Aye. Mr. Ryan, aye. Mr. Serrano, aye. Mr. Simpson . Mr. Simpson, no. Mr. Stewart . Mr. Stewart, no. Mrs. Taylor . Mrs. Taylor, no. Mr. Valededdo, no. Miss wassermanschultz. Miss Wasserman Schultz<\/a>, aye. Mr. Womack . Mr. Womack, no. Mr. Yoder . Mr. Yoder, no. Mr. Young . Mr. Young, no. There are members that would like to record mr. Cuear. Mr. Calvert recorded no. Mr. Palazzo. Recorded no. Anyone further . If not, clerk will call the roll. Role. Or tally. On this vote, the ayes are 22 and the nays are 30. The amendment is not agreed to. Further amendments. Lets see who was in line here . Mr. Price, in order of seniority. Yes. Amendment on the desk. Amendment offered by mr. Price. Distinction, of course. Yes, distinction. Im offering this amendment on behalf of mrs. Captor and myself. It would address cpps front line Staffing Shortage<\/a> and pay for the increase in cvp staffing by reducing the bills bloating funding for i. C. E. Enforcement. Mr. Chairman, in past years, this subcommittee has targeted our limited Immigration Enforcement<\/a> resources to prioritize individuals who have committed serious crimes or who pose a threat to our communities. Thats not provided a free pass to anybody, but it has assumed that discretion must be exercised by enforcement authorities. Of course, thats something that every Law Enforcement<\/a> agency does. President trump and secretary kelly also talk a good talk about targeting dangerous people. But their enforcement actions, in reality, are unfocused and indiscriminate. For example, in the region covered by i. C. E. s atlanta field office, that includes my home state of north carolina, there were nearly 700 arrests of immigrants with no criminal records from january through march of this year, compared with only 137 such arrests during the comparable period in 2016. The bill before us, unfortunately, would lavishly fund such undisciplined actions, increasing by 750 billion interior Immigration Enforcement<\/a> by i. C. E. , they would support 44,000 detention beds. Thats an increase of 5,000 at a time that apprehensions actually are down. And it would hire 1,000 additional i. C. E. Agents. The number of i. C. E. Agents has already tripled from fiscal 03 to fiscal 16. Theres not a need for 1,000 additional hires in fiscal 18 and thats more than the department could properly vet and train. There is another need, though. And its one we can address. Funding to address cvps current front line shortage at our ports of entry. Despite the fact that the officers have been chronically understaffed at our ports of entry, the bill includes no new funding for the shortage of nearly 3,500 cvp officers to date. These officers serve our country by promoting legitimate travel and trade, preventing illegal entry of individuals and prohibitive goods, enforcing customs, immigration, and agricultural laws and regulation. In 2016, cvp officers encountered over 274,000 undocumented immigrants, they seized 6,000 pounds of illegal narcotics, 62 million in illegal currency, all the while processing over 390 million legitimate travelers and 2. 2 trillion in legal imports over land, air, and sea. Trade and travelrelated job creation, border security, and mitigating wait times at the ports of industry all require adequate cvp staffing. Our amend would take an adequate step towards fixing this problem. It would take 704 million in additional increased funding for Immigration Enforcement<\/a> and reallocate first 543 million to hiring an additional 2310 customs officers, and secondly, directing 161 million to Homeland Security<\/a> investigations. Prioritizing this investigations work will do far more to keep our communities safe and our nation secure than arresting students, Small Business<\/a> owners, religious leaders, others who have committed no other crime beyond crossing the border to better their lives and those of their family in the United States<\/a>. I urge the adoption of our amendment. Thank you, mr. Price. Chairman carter . I rise in opposition to the amendment offered by mr. Price and miss captor. Cutting the ons funding for beds will lead to a release of criminals and other removable aliens into communities across the country. And lead to increased border crossings as smugglers see that the rule of law no longer exists. Adding funding to hire cvp officers is commendable, but as we all know, the department has struggled to hire officers in recent years. The same can be said for adding funds to i. C. E. Homeland security investigations. Funds will be unspendable, therefore a waste of the limited resources we have. I ask you to join me in opposing this amendment. Mr. Chairman, i rise in support of the price amendment. As mr. Price has made clear, cvp has a staffing model for customs officers that makes clear we are well short of where we need to be. If history is a guide, then we cannot count on the authorizing committees to move legislation that would authorize new fee revenue. If we hope to hire new customs officers, we will need discretionary funding in this bill. And while there are some increases in the bill for homemade security investigations, Additional Support<\/a> would have a significant beneficial impact on investigations into Human Trafficking<\/a>, child exploitation, intellectual property rights, violations, and other critical priorities. By adopting this amendment, we would be prioritizing criminal investigations, border security, and the facilitation of trade and travel over civil Immigration Enforcement<\/a> that is more aggressive than necessary. I know that there are concerns about whether cvp could actually hire all of these additional officers, and i share that concern. I will say, however, that based on what wave seen over the last year, i have more confidence in cvps ability to hire and retain custom officers than its ability to hire and retain Border Patrol<\/a> agents. Im hopeful the improvements cvp has made to its hiring processes will allow it to hire the additional customs officers mr. Price is proposing to fund. I know one thing for sure, however. If we dont provide funding for new officers, cvp will definitely be unable to make any progress towards its hiring goal. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment. Thank you, general, for your comments. Miss captors recognized . Miss louie, did you want to go first . Miss captor . Thank you very much. I rise in strong support of the price captor amendment and just say to my colleagues, ports. Ports. Thats what we have to focus on. And the budget itself is nearly 2 billion over last year, if you look at the different accounts, and i offered this amendment along with mr. Price, because of the importance of ports. Which have been short changed for far too long by the department of Homeland Security<\/a>. These positions have experienced chronic understaffing at the ports for years. And whats interesting is, if you read the report itself, it says that most foreign source Illegal Drugs<\/a> and contraband are transported through the ports of entry. Pretty clear. I offer this amendment because it includes no new funding to address cvps current front line Staffing Shortage<\/a>s at the p o s ports of entry. To reiterate, theres a longstanding existing vacancy rate of nearly 1,400 existing cvp officers at the ports and cvps own working analytic staff model indicates an additional 2,100 additional cvp officers need to be hired to meet the current staffing needs. Were talking about a total ports officer under Staffing Shortage<\/a> of 3,500 today. Meanwhile, an additional 100 million has been included in this bill to hire 500 more Border Patrol<\/a> agents for the southern border. This is despite the reality that the committee acknowledges in this very bill their concern that attrition continues to outpace hiring of the Border Patrol<\/a> agents. And further, weve already seen a steady decline in individuals attempting to cross the border, as weve seen a steady uptick in the violations of human rights perpetrated by the current Border Patrol<\/a> agent. So again, this committee acknowledges in our report that the current agents have gone as far as to violate our laws in denying asylum to refugees who present themselves at the border. The reality is the number of immigration and Customs Enforcement<\/a> agents has nearly tripled since 2003. And this bill provides funding for an additional 1,000 more. And we know what will happen to children, to dreamers and their families to Asylum Seekers<\/a> and longtime residents of our country who pose no risk to public safety. So to fund 500 more Border Patrol<\/a> agents, 1,000 additional i. C. E. Agents, when our ports are desperate and the need is desperate for inspection, we also have an economic argument in that it for every additional 33 hurkz additional cvp officers hired, dont you get complaints from your companies with the books all lined up and they cant get stuff from the ports item understaffed ports lead to long delays in passenger and commercial lanes as customers and cargo wait to enter our country and these result in real economic losses to our economy. In my own region, let me tell you, the great lakes, ports are significantly understaffed. So trade and travelrelated job creation, border security, and mitigating wait times at the ports of entry require adequate cvp staffing at our ports of entry, and that is why we must reprioritize our accounts and fund agents who will help our economy grow. And i know chairman carter is capable of this. And im begging him to somehow, as the bill moves forward, to support the price captor amendment in a workable form. Thank you, mr. Captor. Miss louie is recognized. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I recognize rhise in strong sup price captor amendment, which would remove funding from i. C. E. Enforcement and unreasonable increases to detention beds and use it more wisely, including to combat a real epidemic facing our nation, Human Trafficking<\/a>. It will also provide support for cvp officers at ports of entry. Their presence is widely understood to be integral to crossborder trade. These are much worthier efforts deserving of funding than an unnecessary wall or increased funding to tear families apart. For example, in 2016 alone, listen to these numbers. The national Human Trafficking<\/a> hotline received reports of 8,042 cases of Human Trafficking<\/a>, a 35 increase from 2015. We must provide Law Enforcement<\/a> with the tools to eliminate Human Trafficking<\/a> and frankly increase awareness. Human trafficking is happening everywhere, every day, affecting all nationalities, age ranges, and socioeconomic statuses. Robustly Funding Initiatives<\/a> to stomp it out is far better use of taxpayer dollars than increased enforcement and increased detention beds. Miss Wasserman Schultz<\/a> is recognized. I rise in strong support of mr. Prices important amendment. For much of the reasons that the gent gentlelady from new york just went through. But i think its important that we note that this nation currently spends 2 billion a area and over 5 million a day on immigrant detention. I. C. E. Is mandated to keep 34,000 detention beds occupied each day. This is a completely arbitrary and the majority now seeks to increase that number even more. It is disgraceful. No other Law Enforcement<\/a> agency is subjected to quota, dictated by congress. Instead of spending critical taxpayer funds on this endeavor, as miss louie indicated, we should be spending money to combat genuine atrocities, such as Human Trafficking<\/a>. Mr. Chairman, the price amendment does just that. Human trafficking is a devastating crime and a form of modernday slavery, involving the exploitation of mainly women and children, who are societys most vulnerable members. Thats who we ought to be looking out for in the homemade security bill. The department of state estimates that teen 14,500 to 17,500 people are trafficked in the United States<\/a> each year. Under the justice victims of trafficking act, Congress Asked<\/a> the Justice Department<\/a> to develop a National Strategy<\/a> to combat Human Trafficking<\/a>, and that report was completed in january of this year. Weve talked about how horrific Human Trafficking<\/a> is. Weve ordered studies and reports and now it is time for us to act. If we are deeply committed to combatting the scourge of Human Trafficking<\/a>, then we should support mr. Prices amendment, which prioritizes resources with an aggressive response to protect the defenseless. And i urge my colleagues to do more than just talk about our relentless opposition to Human Trafficking<\/a> and support the price amendment. I yield back. Thank the gentlewoman for her comments. Mr. Price, a minute to close. Thank you, mr. Chairman. The amendment that ive offered is quite straight forward. It increases our security while simultaneously increasing the legal flow of people and commerce. Increasing the number of cvp officers has been a bipartisan patriot for members of this committee for many years. The request dates back to the bush administration. We now have an opportunity to act on this. And we can do it without a single fee increase, without a single change in the tax code. We do it simply by being good stewards of taxpayer dollars and redirecting wasteful enforcement funding towards genuine National Security<\/a>. I urge adoption of the amendment. The questions thank you. Questions on the amendment, all those in favor say aye . Aye. All of those opposed, say nay. In my opinion, the nays have it. Mr. Agular, aye. Mr. Amday . No. Mr. Bishop . Yes. Mr. Calvert . No. Mr. Carter . No. Mr. Cartwright . Aye. Miss clark . Aye. Mr. Cole . No. Mr. Quayar . Mr. Kufrlson . No. Mr. Dent . No. Mr. Diaz balart . No. Mr. Fleishman . No. Mr. Fortenberry . No. Mr. Free liz highen . No. Mr. Graves . No. Dr. Harris . No. Miss Herrera Butler<\/a> . No. Mr. Jenkins . No. Mr. Joyce . Miss captor . Aye. Mr. Killmer . Aye. Miss lee . Aye. Miss louie . Aye. Miss mccollum . Aye. Miss manning . Aye. Mr. Molnar . No. Mr. Newhouse . No. Mr. Palazzo . No. Miss pingree . Aye. Mr. Price . Aye. Mr. Quigley . Aye. Miss robi . No. Mr. Rogers . No. Mr. Rooney . No. Miss roibl allard . No. Mr. Ryan . Mr. Ryan . Mr. Serrano . Mr. Serrano aye. Mr. Simpson . No. Mr. Stewart . No. Mr. Taylor . No. Mr. Value dao . No. Mr. Ve last qui . Aye. Miss Wasserman Schultz<\/a> . Aye. Mr. Womack . No. Mr. Yoder . No. Mr. Young . Mr. Young . Mr. Young, no. Are there members that wish to record their vote . Mr. Ryan . Aye. Mr. Ryan is recorded as an aye. Mr. Joyce . How would you like to be recorded . Mr. Joyce is recorded a no. Anyone further voting one way or the other . If not, the clerk will tally. On this vote, the ioayes are 22. The anyways are 30. The amendment is not agreed to. The chair recognizes mr. Newhouse for an amendment. Mr. Chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. Would you consider it read by the clerk . The time is yours, five minutes. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I would like to bring to you an item of great importance. Repeated evidence over the past decades has shown that there are some jobs in agriculture, and you may find this surprising, that Many Americans<\/a> simply do not want to do. Even though a lot of these jobs offer competitive wages with similar nonagricultural types of occupations, theyre physically demanding, theyre outdoors, so youre subject to the elements, all seasons, all weather. Theyre often seasonal or transitory. Theyre just its just hard work. The labor situation agriculture has been a concern for many years. Today, large sections of the Agricultural Industry<\/a> in our country face a critical lack of workers. This is worsened by the fact that the h2a program, commonly thought of as the ag guest worker program, is just not working for all of agriculture. Agriculture has changed. Modern techniques are different than they used to be. Seasonality that used to define agriculture does not exist as it used to. More and more Fresh Produce<\/a> is produced in greenhouses. Crops like mushrooms can be harvested year round. And certainly, a great example is the dairy industry, which is currently excluded from utilizing the h2a program because milking cows is not seasonal. Cows need to be milked every day. Two to three times a day, 20 you know, 365 days a year. Most of you have dairy in your district. Most of you have, i know all of you have a dairy in your state. So this is something that should be of importance to you. Many operations often have multiple crops on their pharmacy, with harvests that come one right after another. In short, pharmacy have multiple seasons condensed sbointo their operations. All of agriculture may use h2a programs, so its more truly our nations ag guest worker program. To be clear, h2a would still be a temporary program. This would not change the time limits that a worker employed through the h2a program can stay in the United States<\/a>. It would not change the requirements on farmers to show they are hiring domestic workers. It would just ensure that all of agriculture can utilize this valuable program. Its a Small Starting<\/a> point, but something we can do to provide farmers who need access to workers, by just making it clear that all of ag can utilize h2a, and i would ask that all of my c compadres would please accept the amendment. Im sure theyre listening. Thank you, mr. Newhouse. Chairman carter. Thank you, chairman. I rise in support of this amendment. This program has been in long need of reform. Additionally, the Judiciary Committee<\/a> is not opposed to us including the language. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Any further you have a minute to close. Anyone further . Mr. Chairman . Miss captor . Yes, i would like a clarification from the chair or the gentlemen offering the amendment. Would this be considered language from an authorizing committee . We are now including authorized language in an appropriations bill . Who can clarify that for me . I would be happy to yield to whoever would care to address . This is a legislative appropriations bill. Anyone further on this . Ill inform the Judiciary Committee<\/a> does not have any objection to this. Its legislating on thank you, this reminds me. Ill be brief. I hear time and time again that this is okay with the authorizing committee. When i first was on this committee, what we needed to have was a letter. We literally had a letter from the Ranking Member<\/a> and from the chair of the committee jointly saying that they were waving, that they didnt need to have a hearing on this and they didnt want to do this. So, ive noticed this trend before and i was going to Say Something<\/a> the last time it came up, mr. Newhouse. And now im doing it on your legislation. Who has signed off on this . Has a Ranking Member<\/a> signed off on it . Because the committee is both minority and majority. I yield back. Mr. Dloro is recognized. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. This is really a very radical step that fundamentally changes the h2a program, which was intended to provide labor for businesses that are seasonal or temporary. The reason for the temporary seasonality limitation in the h2a program is that it prevents yearround jobs from being taken by foreign workers. Employers that are trying to fill yearround jobs should do so by competing like other employers by raising wages and by improving working conditions. This is clearly legislating on an appropriations bill. The united farm workers of america, the aflcio, the ufcw, and farm worker justice just learned of this amendment and oppose both the way that this is being done and the substance of the amendment. The place to start, if there is a labor shortage is legalization of workers that are here and who are experienced. The implications of this amendment are not thought through. And without a policy that discourages overstays and protects u. S. Workers that want these jobs, this is very misguided. We strongly urge you to oppose this amendment. I strongly urge you to oppose this amendment. And the notion that we can just, all of a sudden, come up with something at the last minute for some reason or for someones interest on this is inappropriate in the appropriations committee. Thank you. Mr. Quayar . Thank you, i respectfully disagree with my fellow colleagues here. I do support this amendment. Because, again, i represent an area that has a lot of ag. And ive seen a lot of my constituents that have been willing to pay 14, 15 an hour more, but they cant find any workers, as i mentioned. My father was a migrant worker. Its a hard job. If an american wants to do it, let them do it. I know its a hard job, because my mom and my dad did that. But if theres no American Worker<\/a> that wants to do that, then in order to keep our ag industry moving, weve got to have some workers. So i strongly support this amendment and its the right thing to do. Thank you. Mr. Agular is recognized . Thank you, i wanted to stand and speak in support of mr. Newhouses amendment which would support the agriculture communities near my communities by allowing employers to use the h2a program. The Program Supports<\/a> agricultural communities struggle to have the necessary workforce required to keep up production, in allowing them to hire temporary foreign help. Our Rural Communities<\/a> and agriculture communities continue to struggle, having a workforce that meets their production. While i think that there are some details that could be worked out and i encourage the author of the amendment to work out those detail tlus rule making and other avenues, this amendment would help us in the shortterm and allow us to continue to have conversations about longer term policies. Thank you and i yield back. Thank you, gentlemen, for his comments. Have a minute to close. Mr. Newhouse . Then were going to vote. Chairman, thank you all for your thoughtful comments on this very important issue. But let me just remind you that this is these will still not be permanent workers. There still is an 11month limit that these people can be in the United States<\/a> and then have to go back to their home country. So it has been thought through, also. Let me just tell you, the implications of doing this have been very well thought through. And the implications are that our important Agricultural Industry<\/a> will have the necessary workers they need to continue to put food and fiber in front of the american population. So i would ask support for the amendment. Thank the gentlemen. The questions on the new house amendment. All of those in favor say aye . Aye . All of those opposed said nay . In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. Further amendments . Mr. Charirman, i have an amendment at the desk. An amendment offered by miss Roybal Allard<\/a>. Consider the amendment be considered as read. It is considered read and the gentlewoman is recognized. This would give the secretary of the homeland of security the continue the deferred action for child arrivals program, or daca. Although i believe the secretary impolicesy has the authority, this would make it explicit. It allows them to continue their studies and work legally in the economy. To be eligible, they must have clean records verified by background checks. When daca participants first signed up for the program, it was an opportunity to come out of the shadows to put anxieties of the past behind them and focus on the future. It would be the very definition of cruelty to take that away from them now. I know this committee is often uncomfortable with inserting authorizing provisions to appropriations bills, although i think we are a little bit pregnant in this regard. In general, i agree we should avoid using authorizing language unless the circumstances are particularly compelling. I can think of nothing more compelling than helping these individuals who find themselves in such dire circumstances through no fault of their own. This amendment is intended to have the highest, lightest possible touch to hopefully achieve a just result. While it is an authorization, it would not compel the president or the secretary to do anything. The president said he would be the one to decide if daca continues. This amendment would simply make clear that he has the authority to continue the program, if he chooses to do so. I urge my colleagues, no, i actually plead with my colleagues to not waste this opportunity and to do the right thing by these young americans. Lets not turn our backs on them now. Thank you, mr. Chairman, and i ask for an aye vote. Thank the gentlewoman for her comments. Chairman carter . I rise in strong opposition to this amendment. While i you said the Ranking Member<\/a>s concerns, this bill is not the proper place to adjudicate this program. The fauuture status of these individuals should be decided by the committees of jurisdiction, and not by the appropriations committee. Therefore, i oppose this amendment and i urge everyone to vote against the amendment. Thank you. Further discussion. Miss louie is recognized . I rise in strong support of the amendment. With the mixed messages coming out of the administration on deferred action for dreamers, families need the stability this measure provides. Dreamers are brought to this country at very young ages. They grow up with our children or grandchildren, have similar cultural experiences to our children or grandchildren, and know america as home. We are in dire need of comprehensive immigration reform. Until then, lets give families and our comment the clarity to live productively and free from fear. Support this amendment. Gentlewoman for her comments. Mr. Agular is recognized. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Today i wanted to support in Ranking Member<\/a> Roybal Allard<\/a>s amendment. Daca recipients were brought to this country as Young Children<\/a> by their parents through no fault of their own. They consider themselves to be americans, living, working, and going to school in the only nation they have ever known. The daca program has shielded more than 500,000 lawabiding young people from legislation. These young people actively contribute to our communities and our lives here. Daca is currently upheld by an executive order and over the past several months, its certainty and the future of hundreds of thousands of young People Living<\/a> within our borders has been unclear. This would still allow the administration an opportunity to weigh in. It merely authorizes them to do so. When we talk about daca, sympathies thisn isnt just abot a policy. These are about people and families and their livelihoods have been built on the promise that they can stay if they follow the rules. And they have. And as we work toward a comprehensive solution, we should keep that promise to these young folks. Thats exactly what this amendment does. If we want to let the promise to dreamers crumble, we directly threaten the future of hundreds of thousands of yuck People Living<\/a> in our communities and across this country. I urge the committee to do the right thing and support this amendment. Thank you, gentlemens, for the comments. The legislation right before the writer by mr. Newhouse was authorizing language. This is also authorizing language and i would ask the chairman to consider this. I know its difficult, but its one of the right things to do. Theres a lot of kids who are brought in at a very young age. In fact, in texas, under governor rick perry, when i was secretary of state, we actually had a the first dreamer, one of the first dreamer legislations to allow kids to be able to go off to college. Weve done that in a very conservative state like texas, and we ought to do this. These kids, some of them dont know anything else. Might not know mexico, might not know guatemala, what was the result . Leadership of both parties opposed it. And will either be dead or left congress. But the bottom line is, thats what we need to do. Many times our democratic friends say, we need to do immigration reform, and theyre right. But we need to do it through the way it was designed by our founding fathers, and not by patches, by regulators and people who have a cause in this kon kongs facongressional in thi appropriations committee. Thats the wrong way to do it. Right now the president has said this is on hold. The courts are looking at the policy of this. And this is not the way to go about doing this. And this is serious. This is affecting many, many, many thousands of lives. I admit that. I think friends on our side admit that. But if we dont do it the right way, then the next time we change people in this congress, they will do it the wrong way again. And on something as serious as this, its time for us to step back and say, this is not the right way to do it and the threat is not so real that we need to do it. Fear drives fear in this country. And i would urge you, urge you, lets try to do this the regular order, in the committees of jurisdiction. And lets fight that battle there, on something so serious as these young people that youre talking about. I want to say that this process, we were doing it today, i oppose. And i will hope youll join me in opposing. Thank you, mr. Carter. To close, mr. Serrano is recognize recognized. Just very briefly, i dont usually lake to disagree with another member, because aisle not that kind of a person, but you said that their emotions on both sides, mr. Chairman, and there are. And i think you also alluded to that there was a difference of opinion. Well, i do something and ive done something in the past few years, but as i watch on the other side, the faces of people and im wondering what theyre thinking when we discuss these subjects, i believe and notwithstanding what the final vote will be on any of these amendments, there is sentiment on the other side of the aisle, on the republican side, for this issue to be resolved and resolved here. Listen to me closely. I honestly believe that many of you honestly agree with us. Or agree with yourselves that this is the right thing to do, to take care of these young people that know no other country, except this one. And so probably the final result will be the party line or whatever people think the party line is. But i dont think in the republican party, its clear cut on how people feel about dreamers and about daca and about these young people. I think people understand that they fall into a different category. They came here through no choice of their own. They grew up in this country. Youve heard it a million times. They know no other country. They dont speak english with a spanish accent. If they speak spanish, they speak it with an american accent. They are as american as apple buy and they should remain that way and we should not throw them out. Thank you, mr. Serrano. The gentlelady has a minute to close. Mr. Chairman, i wish the Authorization Committee<\/a> had the will to do the right thing. I wish the congress had the will to do the right thing. But how many more years do we have to wait for that to happen . In the meantime, i would like to believe that we are not doomed to perpetual intransigence when it comes to immigration. I would like to think there is middle ground and compromise we can find. Something that recognizes the importance of controlling our borders, while acknowledging the difficult plight faced by so many immigrant families. If we are ever to reach middle ground, we need to start somewhere. And i would like to think of no or i can think of no better or fair place than with this amendment. My colleagues ask that you support this amendment, so that the dreamers can continue looking forward to their future, as part of this great nation, the only nation we know. Thank you, mr. Chairman, and i ask for an aye vote. Questions on the gentlewomans amendment . All those in favor . If i pardon strike the last word, if you would, please. Strike the last word. Happy to recognize you. I have Great Respect<\/a> for the chairman. And i understand what he was saying about authorizing an appropriations bill. But im really puzzled with that argument, because having worked on this issue, as you said, so eloquently, for two years, you probably understand it more than most of the people in this room. We give our particular experiences, i talk about how families need stability. Im just giving one example, but there are many about authorizing in the appropriations bill. If im not mistaken, on Financial Services<\/a>, there was an 80page bill that was included this the Financial Services<\/a> appropriations bill. Seems to me last time i checked, thats authorizing on an appropriations bill, sir. So i think given the emotions on this issue, given the mixed messages, that are coming out of the administration on deferred action for dreamers, it seems to me families desperately need the stability that this measure provides. And i want to repeat again, you know, dreamers have brought to this country at very young age. They grow up with our children, they have similar cultural experiences to our children. They know america as home. To i agree with the distinguished chairman, my friend, that we need comprehensive immigration reform. But until then, for all of us, think carefully about, we would rather not include authorizations on our appropriations bill, but weve all had the experience of voting for it. Or most of us have. So, lets give families in our community the clarity to live productively, free from fear. This is an urgent issue. Many of us in our communities understand how much pain and suffering is being caused now. So i just plead with the chairman again, lets make another exception, besides on Financial Services<\/a>, this is important to people. Thank the gentle woman for her comments. Questions on the gentlewomans amendment . All of those in favor, say aye . Those opposed say no. In the amendment, the nays have it. Seeing the requisite number of hands, well call roll. [ roll call ] [ roll call ] [ roll call ] [ roll call ] [ roll call ] [ roll call ] [ roll call ] [ roll call ] are there members who would wish to record their call . Mr. Rooney . Mr. Rooney recorded his no. Anyone further . Seeing no, the clerk will tally. On this vote, the ayes are 22, the nays are 30, the amendment is not agreed to. Further amendments, miss agular . Mr. Chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. The clerk will read. An amendment offered by mr. Agular. Its considered read and please proceed. Thanks. Thank you, mr. Chairman. This amendment seex ks to dispe the authorizations appropriations piece of the debate we just had. My amendment simply prohibits any funds being used to eliminate the deferred action for childhood arrivals program. Within this subcommittee mark, within this bill, Daca Recipients<\/a> or dreamers were brought here to the United States<\/a>. And i wanted to run through just a few of the eligibility requirements since weve been talking about the program. Children under the age of 16, at time of entry, under the age of 31, by 2012, continuous residents in the United States<\/a>, at least five years. Physical presence in the United States<\/a> since 2012, at the time the request was made, not in lawful immigration status, not convicted of a felony, in school, graduated from high school, obtained General Education Development<\/a> certificate or honorably discharged by the United States<\/a> armed forces or coast guard. This is about keeping a promise to our kids. I understand if we want to have further discussions about this process. Mr. Chairman, i am completely with you that we need to have this comprehensive approach. Our colleagues have talked about it in their opening remarks and i could not be more supportive of those efforts. What my amendment seeks to do is say for this year, for this fiscal year, while we have those discussions, why cant we prevent the administration from eliminating these programs, so we can have this discussion, so we can talk about protecting our kids, so we can talk about what the future of this Immigration Program<\/a> looks like. Were having amendments on h2as, h2bs and other stuff. You mentioned Patchwork Solutions<\/a>, and i agree. If were going to offer Patchwork Solutions<\/a> to our immigration process, why shouldnt we include these young dreamers . Why shouldnt their voices be heard here . Thats all im asking, with amendment, it simply prevents the administration from ending this program in this fiscal year. Its not an authorization. It puts this committee on record. And there may be efforts to remove this provision later on in the process, and i look forward to standing with those, as well. But right here, right now, why cant these kids have a voice . Why cant we allow and speak for them and to say, we want this program, we recognize your status, we want to do everything we can thats right by you, as you fulfill the promise that you have. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thanks the gentlemen for his remarks. Chairman carter . Mr. Chairman, again, i rise in opposition to this amendment, also. There are important issues that we talked about here. Were concerned with them, they need to be addressed, but they must not be done in a thoughtful manner. And this is not the place to do it. Any decisions on the future of this program could be made by the committee of jurisdiction, once again, not through an amendment on this bill, barring the use of funds. Mr. Goodlap, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee<\/a>, is opposed to this language, and will fight it on the floor. And the reality is, this is an emotional issue, as we talked about. The patch goes on, if this passes today, it gets ripped off. Is this a good thing for the people that were dealing with . I say its not. I say, lets we know what our responsibilities are and theyve been shirked in some places and this is not the place for this to be done, so i strongly oppose this gentlemans agreement, and i ask for a no vote. Roybal allard is recognized. Mr. Chairman, i rise in strong support of the agular amendment. As mr. Agular has discussed, this amendment would prohibit funding for dhs to stop the daca programming. Let me just say that anyone who objected to my amendment, because it included authorizing language, this should be a very acceptable alternative. These young people brought to this country as children, sometimes as infants, are under constant threat of deportation to a country they dont know where and where they may not even speak the language. The daca program simply puts their cases on hold until Congress Gets<\/a> its act together on comprehensive immigration reform. They deserve a chance to work or to continue their education in the only home they know or remember. Taking this opportunity away from them now would be cruel and it would punish those young people coming forward and attempting to do the right thing. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. Thank the gentlewoman. Mr. Taylor is recognized. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I rise to speak to this amendment. I do believe this is neither the time nor the place for this argument. So as the last one, i will be opposing it. However, i do think that this debate, a bipartisan one, is one that we should have in this congress. The president has said hes going to keep the daca program in place. But the overall legal standing of the program is questionable. A longterm solution has yet to be debated and acted upon. But we should have this debate. To me, these kids brought up on our soil are just as american as i am. The child should not pay or be held accountable for the crimes or actions of their parents. I look forward to working with my claolleagues on both sides o the aisle in the alterization committees and this one to find a compassionate, fair, and longterm solution. I yield back. Taylor mr. Quigley is recognized. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I support this amendment. But i do want to suggest that and i respect the words of the chairman of the subcommittee, here. But i think its fair for us to say, okay, if were not going to authorize, then anybody authorizes. Were not going to have any policy riders. Were going to go through the whole cycle with no policy riders, because theyre authorizing, right . We use broadbased concepts and rules, to justify our views on a particular bill. But in the final analysis, its almost always a matter of convenience, right . One day were federalists and one day were not. Were antifederalists. One day, you know, were big on states rights and if it doesnt pay, then were going to change our mind. Governments role in society seems to change at the same pace, appreciate the concept, bt ive been in what now several terms in this committee and wave never followed the rules. Weve always flip flopped whenever it was convenient for us to do so so support the concept of the bill we are looking at. Id be glad to follow the dictates if we are consistent across the award backup pawning. Further discussion on the aguilar amendment be, mr. Diaz bellrd. Then well go to mr. Aguilar to close. First, mr. Chairman ive had multiple conversations with the sponsors of this amendment. I know he is sincere. And the chairman of the subcommittee he is sincere and been involved in a lot of the issues longer than a lot of foengs are. The folks protected by daca those are kids deserving our protection. Those are individuals one thing that defines the United States<\/a> is were that a amere a tok raycy we dont judge people for what the relatives do, with you for what they do. These folks did not make the decisions to come to the United States<\/a> and now theyre in the limbo. The question is for the in my view whether were protecting the kids is the right thing to do. The question is, does this amendment do that . And frankly im not sure. Because and again the sponsor of the amendment and i have had these conversations. I know he is inseer. We have talked about potential ways forward to protect the daca kids. Whats the best way to protect those kids . And by the way, i will tell you i would like to do and i know what he would like to do even more than that. And i dont know, mr. Chairman if this is the right way to proceed and does this actually help or does it actually hurt . I yield back mr. Ms. Lowsy youre recognized. Ill be very brief. I have respect for my good friend mr. Diaz and bell ard and the chairman of the committee process. And i havent heard anyone on this debate saying we shouldnt be protecting the young people. And i am just puzzled. We do all all kinds of as i mentioned authorizing and apprehensions bills. If were all in agreement and the authorization process could take six months a years five years. I dont know how long it takes. Lets just do it now. Lets ep had the kids now and i would like to know, mr. Chairman if there is anyone in the room that disagrees with supporting the daca kids. Lets follow up with my good friends mr. Diaz bell ard and from the haerlt flt comments from the chair. Thank you miss lo. Chairman control cole and aguilar to close. I want to add something for informational purposes. I am sensitive to jurisdictional issues here because ive been caught up in in before. S in just like of a this was my experience with this. My good friend the chairman of the interior probst and i worked very hard last year with our good friend the chairman of the Natural Resources<\/a> on an issue about recognition of indian tribes. We literally thought we had an agreement. And we placed that agreement in the apprehensions bill. And, frankly at the last moment the chairman changed of the Natural Resources<\/a> committee change his mind and pulled our thing right out of the bill. And we had to go down to the floor and have a colloquy. So to mr. Quigleys point we can do this if youve got the chairman onboard of of the authorizing committee. That really has become the deciding factor. Because that person has the ability to file a point of order that will break it it out. In this case i think what my good friend judge carter is telling us is he doesnt have that. And so give. That fact we will, as he said put a band aid on and rip it right off. This really does sometimes the kpt ill give you a time we were successful its the same conway pch case carciera and when my good friend mr. Moran was the chairman of that committee. He said i agree with you on the issue will you offer the amendment i said of course i will. And i called up mr. Simpson waus he was the Ranking Member<\/a> and he said are you going to to get mood and he said tom thats authorizing on an apprehensions bill we never do that until we do. But he said make sure youve got the the approval of the authorizing committees which mr. Moran had. It was going through Natural Resources<\/a>, our good friend mr. Ray haul no longer with us he was for it got it to the senate died over there. The pinpoint is it does get down on the issues are is where the thoeshzing chairman . I will tell you at least since we have been back in the marnlt if anything under Speaker Boehner<\/a> or ryan theyve been more forceful about this than ive seen before. Having gone to the floor and been embarrassed myself thinking we have an agreement i can tell you if you dont have the authorizing count it will die. Aguilar well close and noncall get. I appreciate the using discussions and the robust conversations my colleagues have had. My question is if not now when and what is our path . Why should one individual in this body of 435 be able to hold unthe daca kids from being recognized. Mace what it comes to if someone smoes me a path and to get on the floor and have a conversation with the colleagues. Ill withdraw it i havent seen that. I think the kids deserve a shot. Individuals like the melody clingen fuss the Los Angeles Area<\/a> and this is why its topical. Its been typical of this administration to give good news and follow it with bad news. We dont know if they will change minds the next day. Melody is a daca individual who came from gault law. Lets pass this amendment. Thank you mr. Aguilar the questions on the all in favor say aye. The opinion the renees have it the amendment is not approved. [ roll call ] [ roll call ] [ roll call ] [ roll call ] [ roll call ]. Are there members to wish to record vote for change vote . Is a no and the clerk dsh seeing no one the clerk will taly. Tally. On this vote thea are 25 wp the nays 27. The amendment is not agreed to. And we are going to recess. Please come back right after our three votes, i believe and do whatever you have to do. Chow down and come back prepared for more amendments on the interior bill. Thank you. He speaks to the 2017 boy scouts of America National<\/a> jam bore ee in west virginia. Well both chambers of congress are in session today. The senate gafling in earlier to consider the nomination to be david burn hart to to be deputy interior secretary. Confirmation vote is underway on the isnt that right floor theyve announced procedural vote on health care will happen tomorrow on the house passed Health Care Bill<\/a> with plans to amend that legislation. A time for the not yet announced follow the senate live tonight and tomorrow on cspan 2. The house has been working on several bills including related to veteran as issues and education. The house also considered a med to authorize classified funding for u. S. Intelligence programs and activities. Votes and speeches happening in a half hour at 6 30 eastern follow the house live over on cspan. Tonight on the communicators. The cofounder of ool steve case on his book the third wave and why they thinks were fwe beginning of the third wave of internet zbremt and how he is looking outside of Silicon Valley<\/a> for the newest digital developments. Now were seeing the third wave pick up steam thats going the internet integrated in seemless and pervasive ways sometimes through invisible waist. Transportation, energy, food, pretty important aspects of our lives pretty big sectors of the economy. The reason i wrote the book is because it requires a different mindset or playbook whether youre innovator or policymaker in the third wave","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"archive.org","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","width":"800","height":"600","url":"\/\/ia800805.us.archive.org\/24\/items\/CSPAN3_20170724_191100_House_Committee_Marks_Up_Homeland_Security_Spending_Bill\/CSPAN3_20170724_191100_House_Committee_Marks_Up_Homeland_Security_Spending_Bill.thumbs\/CSPAN3_20170724_191100_House_Committee_Marks_Up_Homeland_Security_Spending_Bill_000001.jpg"}},"autauthor":{"@type":"Organization"},"author":{"sameAs":"archive.org","name":"archive.org"}}],"coverageEndTime":"20240628T12:35:10+00:00"}