Speech #1090173346

Pt. 14 September 21. 2006 that it costs about $4.4 million for a single layer of fencing per milebut the bill calls for doublefencing. which costs more. and also for building allweather roads in the middle. So. using a conservative estimate of $9 million a mile. it would cost nearly $6.6 billion to build the 730 mile fence called for in H.R. 6061. I think it would be better from Congress to resist the temptation to micromanage the Department of Homeland Security and instead to allow it the discretion to spend those billions of dollars on a variety of measurestences in some places and other kinds of barriers in other places. plus other technology and increased border patrol manpowerthat it decides. based on experience and expertise. will do the best job of securing the border. And if those steps turned out to cost less than 730 miles of double fencing. the Department could put the rest of the money to good use. For example. $2 billion would pay for the 35.000 detention beds called for the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (the 9/11 Act) that are need to implement the ending of the socalled catch and release of illegal aliens apprehended alter they cross the border. It would take only $360 million to hire. train and equip 2.000 border patrol agents. while $400 million. 250 more portofentry inspectors and 25 percent more canine detection teams could be added to the field. Or for $400 million every U.S. port of entry could have a radiation portal monitor. so that all incoming cargo can be screened to detect nuclear or radiological material. The three bills we will consider today are not perfect. but they are less problematical and I will vote for them. H.R. 4830. the Border Tunnel Prevention Act would establish new criminal penalties for people involved with constructing illegal tunnels beneath our borders. including those who knowingly finance such actions. with particularly severe penalties for using such tunnels to smuggle illegal immigrants. drugs. weapons of mass destruction or other illegal goods into the United States. I strongly support this strengthening of current law. H.R. 6094. called the Community Protection Act. like corresponding parts of the larger bill I supported last year. would allow for longer detentions of illegal aliens prior to deportation if they have refused to comply with deportation proceedings. pose a threat to community safety or public health. because they have a highly communicable disease. or if their release would threaten national security or have serious adverse consequences for American foreign policy. It includes provisions for periodic review of such detentions and affords these detained aliens an opportunity to seek reconsideration of their cases and to present evidence in support of their release. In addition. it would centralize judicial review of legal challenges to the detention of illegal immigrantssomething that I think is of dubious value but not so bad as to outweigh the rest of the legislation. Further. the bill would explicitly bar admission to the United States of members of criminal street gangs. allow the deportation of illegal aliens who belong to gangs convicted of threatening or attempting crimes. and requires that they be held in detention prior to deportation and makes criminal street gang members September 21. 2006 CONGRI ineligible to receive asylum or temporary protected status. I strongly support these provisions. because criminal street gangs whose members include illegal aliens are a serious and growing problem in too many communities. Finallyfor today. at leastH.R. 6095. the Immigration Law Enforcement Act would establish new procedures to speed resolution of lawsuits brought against the Federal Govemment that are based on the implementation of immigration laws and require the Justice Department to hire more people to prosecute human smuggling cases. It also includes language reaffirming the existing inherent authority of the States. their political subdivisions. such as counties or cities. and their lawenforce agencies to investigate. identify. apprehend. arrest. detain. or transfer to Federal custody aliens in the United States . . . for the purposes of assisting in the enforcement of the immigration laws of the United States in the course of carrying out routine duties. I find this acceptable because the bill says "Nothing in this section may be construed to require law enforcement personnel of a State or political subdivision of a State to-(1) report the identity of a victim of. or a witness to. a criminal offense to the Secretary of Homeland Security for immigration enforcement purposes. or (2) arrest such victim or witness for a violation the immigration laws of the United States." In other words. this is not a mandate and will not interfere with the ability or any state or local government to decide whether and how it will undertake to respond to question of immigration law and policy. matters which are essentially the responsibility of the federal government. Mr. Speaker. nobody should think that passing these bills todaysomething I supportwill come close to completing the work that Congress needs to do regarding immigration. This plateful of slices is not even the full salami the House passed last yeara bill that. by itself. dealt with only part of the full menu of issues that must be addressed. I voted for that bill because I think improving border security is absolutely necessary. But I am convinced it is not sufficient. It does not address the most difficult and challenging aspect of immigration reform. namely the question of how to deal humanely and effectively with the millions of illegal immigrants currently living and working in this country or the difficulties that their employers including many Colorado companies that have contacted meduring the transition to a changed labor market that may follow revisions in current immigration laws. As we all know. the Senate has passed what its supportersincluding President Bushsay is intended to be a comprehensive immigration reform measure. We should follow their lead. Following the Senates lead does not mean simply accepting their bill as it stands.