[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 72 (Wednesday, May 14, 2003)]
[House]
[Pages H4113-H4119]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          TEXAS REDISTRICTING

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Chocola). Under the Speaker's announced 
policy of January 7, 2003, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sandlin) is 
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
  Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Speaker, President Carter once said that we must 
adjust to changing times, but maintain unchanging principles. Today, in 
Texas, we have 53 brave and principled men and women, Texas 
legislators, all who are doing exactly that. They are adjusting to 
changing times. They are maintaining unchanging principles.
  The issue of Texas redistricting has certainly gotten much media 
attention in the last couple of days due to the principled and brave 
actions of 53 Texas patriots. I particularly want to thank east Texas 
Representatives Barry Telford, Mark Homer, Chuck Hopson, Jim McReynolds 
and Dan Ellis for their leadership; also Representatives Dunnam, 
Deshotel and others who have been at the forefront of this battle along 
with many other members of the Texas House.
  The issue of Texas redistricting has been a long road for us, and 
each step of the way paved by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay) has 
been difficult and detrimental to rural Texans and particularly to my 
constituents in east Texas. Right out of the starting block, Tom 
DeLay's race to redistrict has been an absolute sham. We know it, the 
Republicans know it, Tom DeLay knows it. The media in Texas knows it. 
Everybody in this House knows it. It is nothing but a sham.
  From the get-go, the Texas House Republicans refused to unveil a real 
map to the public, refused to have open field hearings, refused to have 
notices in the Spanish language, refused to discuss the issue in the 
light of day, refused to give our voters a choice, and refused to 
consider doing anything other than what Tom DeLay just told them to do.
  Mr. Speaker, I am sure my colleagues have seen the bobblehead dolls 
whose heads bounce in agreement to their owner's demands. The 
leadership of the Texas House comes to mind.
  Let me point out that there is no need to redistrict. Two years ago 
the State legislature could not come to an agreement on a redistricting 
plan, so the courts approved a fair and constitutional congressional 
map for Texas after a full and complete hearing with evidence presented 
by both Democrats and Republicans, with experts, with people from 
communities, with maps, a complete trial before a three-judge panel. 
The plan was agreed upon and voters elected who they felt would best 
represent them in the United States Congress, either Republicans or 
Democrats. It was their choice.
  Tom DeLay's plan seeks to change all that. He wants to choose our 
congressional Representatives for us rather than the voters choosing 
their own Representatives. That is not how we operate in Texas. That is 
not how we operate in this country, and the leader should be ashamed of 
himself.
  On May 7, 2003, the Associated Press attributed the following quote 
to Mr. DeLay: ``I am the majority leader, and we want more seats.''

                              {time}  1930

  That single statement, in all of its arrogance, pretty well sums up 
the consideration, the thought that has gone into the Texas 
redistricting process. We want more seats, and traditions, communities 
of interest, minorities, constituencies be damned. We want more seats, 
and we do not care who you are or who you represent. We want more 
seats, and you cannot do anything about it.
  Well, apparently, they can, and they have. When Barry Telford, Mark 
Homer, Chuck Hobson, and some 50 other Democrats broke the House 
quorum, they used the only option available to halt DeLay's partisan 
assault on Texas. And this option is completely within the rules. It is 
anticipated by the rules of the House. It is a tool available.
  Let us see what some Republicans said, not Tom DeLay's lackeys in 
Washington; but let us see what Republicans in the House in Texas have 
said about this. Representative Charlie Geren, Fort Worth, Republican, 
said, ``The Democrats were doing what they believed they needed to do 
in order to represent their constituents. I understand what they are 
doing. It's just really the only tool in their toolbox,'' Geren said. 
``They are passionate about the map that is in front of us not being 
good for their constituents.'' Representative Pat Haggerty, a 
Republican from El Paso, ``It's the smartest move they could have 
made,'' Haggerty said. ``Under the circumstances, it was the only 
alternative they had. It has been done before. It's in the rules, and 
they are playing by the rules.''
  Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield.
  Mr. SANDLIN. I yield to my friend and colleague from Austin.
  Mr. DOGGETT. In addition to those very persuasive statements from 
Republican leaders in Texas, is the gentleman aware of where President 
Bush, after he had been declared the President-elect by the Supreme 
Court, where he had his initial speech to introduce himself to the 
Nation as our President-elect?
  Mr. SANDLIN. Well, Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I believe I am. 
And as the gentleman well knows, the President had his speech on the 
floor of the House.
  Mr. DOGGETT. In other words, the very same room, the very chamber of 
the Texas capital that is under lockdown tonight is where President 
Bush chose, on his own, to go and introduce himself to the Nation.
  Is the gentleman aware of the individual that he asked to introduce 
himself to the American people as our President-elect?
  Mr. SANDLIN. Reclaiming my time once again, as the gentleman knows, 
Speaker of the House, Democrat Pete Laney, was chosen to introduce the 
new Republican President from Texas.
  Mr. DOGGETT. And I believe the President was complimentary of Mr. 
Laney and of the Texas House of Representatives and its members. And 
where is Mr. Laney tonight?
  Mr. SANDLIN. Apparently, Mr. Laney is along with the other Texas 
heroes. He is in Oklahoma, standing up for Texas voters, standing up 
for the people of Texas and our Constitution after having been trailed 
there by Federal investigators and Federal people that tracked him down 
using Federal funds, for political purposes, to make sure they knew 
where he went.
  Mr. DOGGETT. Well, if the gentleman would yield to me for just a 
couple of minutes on both those points.
  Mr. SANDLIN. Surely.
  Mr. DOGGETT. First, I would say that it is really important to the 
future of our democracy that we permit diverse points of view to be 
heard. I believe that our country is stronger when we respect and show 
tolerance for opposing points of view. And the idea that everyone in 
Washington and in Austin has to follow lockstep behind Tom DeLay and 
his extreme point of view, and I believe his point of view needs to be 
represented here, but I do not think all the rest of us have to agree 
to it. And that is really what this is about.

[[Page H4114]]

  Now, President Bush told our country again and again and again that 
he was a uniter, not a divider. He said that he could work with the 
Texas legislature, and he pointed to people like Pete Laney and said 
what good friends they were and how cooperative they were. In fact, he 
bragged on most every one of those Democrats that is up in Ardmore 
tonight and said what great people they were.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield.
  Mr. SANDLIN. I yield to the gentleman from Waco, Texas.
  Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, I want to follow up on the gentleman's 
point about respecting others with different opinions. I am deeply 
offended, and I think Texans and Americans should be deeply offended, 
that Texas House Republicans have compared these Texas legislators who 
are standing up for the important American principle that citizens 
should have a voice in developing their future, that they have been 
compared to terrorists in Iraq.
  It was Texas legislators who put together playing cards, laughing all 
the way in the last several days, with the faces of Texas-elected 
representatives on those cards, mimicking, they knew absolutely well, 
mimicking the cards that had the faces of Saddam Hussein's terrorists, 
rapists, thugs and mass murderers. I find it offensive in our American 
democracy and Texas democracy that Texas Republican legislators would 
stoop that low in this process.
  Mr. DOGGETT. Well, the gentleman's position is very well founded, 
trying again to tie themselves to our sons and daughters who stood in 
harm's way in our American military, proudly, for our country. But 
right, at that very microphone this morning, our colleague from 
Houston, Mr. Culberson, stood up and compared the same Democrats George 
Bush had his arm around and claimed they were like suicide bombers.
  When I hear that kind of extremism, I think whether it is in Texas or 
up here, that is a fellow that has been spending too much time around 
Tom DeLay. It kind of rubs off. And while we need to tolerate that 
point of view, as extreme as it is, we do not want everybody in America 
to have to be just like Tom DeLay.
  Was he not the same fellow who said that Baylor, up in your town, 
that he thought you could not get a Godly education at Baylor or Texas 
A&M?
  Mr. EDWARDS. The same Tom DeLay, the majority leader of the House, 
who says what is good for Tom DeLay in redistricting is good for Texas 
is the same person who said just a year ago to Texas parents, do not 
send your sons and daughters to Texas A&M University or to Baylor 
University, which is a great university that I am proud to represent in 
my hometown of Waco. He said those universities were too liberal.
  Mr. DOGGETT. Well, I think the gentleman himself had some years over 
at A&M. And I can think, as a Longhorn, of a lot of reasons people 
ought not to go to A&M, but not getting a Godly education there was 
never real high on anyone's list until Tom pronounced it.
  Now, I just want to conclude this part, if the gentleman will 
continue to yield to me.
  Mr. LAMPSON. Before the gentleman concludes, if my colleague will 
yield for just a moment, I want to inject something here, because 
another statement was made that was offensive to me, and that was 
something that Tom DeLay said about the Democrats' behavior in Texas 
was ``so contrary to what Texas is all about, to turn tail and run and 
not to fight for what you believe in.'' Well, not to fight for what you 
believe in is the more correct part. He could not have missed that mark 
in a worse way. It is exactly what a Texan is all about, to stand there 
and fight in the face of knowing they may not be able to win when they 
are attacked. The backs of the Texas legislators were against the wall. 
They decided to make a stand for it for the people of Texas, and I am 
awfully proud of every member who chose to leave Austin, Texas, 
temporarily.

  And they do not want to be gone from there. They have their work to 
do. They know they do. And they are most anxious to return. But they 
want to do it in a way they know their voices are going to be heard and 
so the voices of the people they represent will indeed be heard.
  Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt that the action of 
leaving the State of Texas and going from Austin to Ardmore, and I have 
yet to find anyone in Austin that goes to Ardmore for a vacation, but I 
am sure it is a nice place, and I know it has the Gene Autry Museum and 
other fine attributes; but they did not go up there on a lark. They 
took this extraordinary action because, as our colleague from Marshall, 
Texas (Mr. Sandlin) pointed out, they had extraordinary intimidation, 
they had extraordinary arrogance.
  But the point I want to emphasize, when we hear these attacks made on 
these brave Texas legislators, remember who their pal was just a few 
years ago. That was Governor George Bush. That is where he chose to 
introduce himself to the Nation. I would just urge again tonight that 
the President consider the problems that are being caused in Texas by 
this kind of extremism, and that if he is a uniter and not a divider, 
though we have not seen a great deal of evidence of that, that he unite 
the Texas House; that he go right to the place where he kicked off his 
Presidency and work to bring people back together. Because we cannot go 
on in this fashion.
  There is a second aspect to this that is very troubling, and the 
gentleman from Marshall made reference to it, and that is the 
involvement of Federal resources. It is one thing for a colleague to 
proclaim these extreme views, and it is one thing for the very Texas 
legislators that our colleague is talking about to basically concede 
that redistricting in Texas is of, by, and for Tom DeLay. In fact, not 
only are they not denying it, I think he is kind of proud of it, that 
he can go down there and kind of throw his weight around and tell 
people where to draw the lines and which communities to cut up.
  But it goes beyond that, that kind of arrogance, that kind of 
intimidation when you begin to use taxpayer-financed resources to 
advance that agenda and when you pull in institutions from Federal law 
enforcement and try to convert them into your private police force.
  That is why, as the gentleman from Jefferson County and from Harris 
County and from McLennan County and from all the Texans that are here, 
we have joined today in a statement and in a communication to Attorney 
General John Ashcroft, to Secretary Tom Ridge at the Homeland Security 
Department, and to Director Robert Mueller of the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation. Because we are most alarmed that yesterday Tom DeLay 
himself indicated that he already had a United States Attorney, a 
taxpayer-funded employee of the people in Texas, researching how they 
could employ Federal resources to bring these legislators, who have 
committed no crime and certainly there is no Federal offense involved 
in staying there and working in Ardmore, Oklahoma, until the 
Republicans in Austin decide to play by the rules.
  We also read from today's press that Tom DeLay told reporters the 
justification for this, of bringing in U.S. marshals or the Federal 
Bureau of Investigation is because redistricting concerns a Federal 
issue. And a spokeswoman, according to another publication in the U.S. 
Attorney's office in San Antonio, Texas, said she had no official 
comment; but a source confirmed that an unidentified person had called 
to inquire about federalizing the arrest warrant. That is taxpayer 
resources. That is using the Federal Bureau of Investigation in much 
the way that Richard Nixon did in Watergate.
  And there is another aspect of this, a further report. How did they 
happen to find these Texas legislators at a Holiday Inn in Ardmore, 
Oklahoma, of all places? Well, it did not just happen by chance. 
According to today's Fort Worth Star-Telegram, one Federal agency that 
became involved early on was the Air and Marine Interdiction and 
Coordination Center based in Riverside, California, which now falls 
under the auspices of the Homeland Security Department.
  The agency received a call to locate a specific Piper turboprop 
aircraft. It was determined that the plane belonged to former House 
Speaker Pete Laney, Democrat, of Hale Center, and I would add 
parenthetically, who just happens to be the same Pete Laney that was 
introducing President Bush to

[[Page H4115]]

the Nation in the House of Representatives' chambers in Austin that is 
locked down tonight.
  The paper goes on to report the location of Laney's plane proved to 
be a key piece of information, because Craddick, that is Texas House 
Speaker Tom Craddick, said it is how he determined the Democrats were 
in Ardmore.
  That is a use of Federal resources. We have had ample reason to be 
concerned in recent months about whether the Federal law enforcement 
services would be used with reference to our private lives, and we have 
ample reason to be concerned when a powerful figure like majority 
leader Tom DeLay is involved with these Federal agencies when the 
Federal agencies from Homeland Security are out there tracing a plane 
operated by an elected official in Texas to give clues as to where 
these legislators are.

                              {time}  1945

  Mr. SANDLIN. Reclaiming my time for just a moment, let me make an 
inquiry of the gentleman, and I would like for him to continue, but let 
me make sure that I have this straight so that we understand what we 
are saying and what he is talking about.
  Is the gentleman saying that the home Homeland Security Department 
that is charged with our homeland defense, that at a time when we are 
facing terrorism abroad and at home, and at a time when our State has a 
$10 billion deficit, and at a time when the Federal Government has a $7 
trillion debt, are you saying at a time when these folks are charged 
with protecting our shores, our homes, our families, the very security 
of our country, at a time when that is their charge, that the 
government is using them for a political purpose to track down 
airplanes of State legislators for their political purpose?
  Mr. DOGGETT. That would appear to be the report not from me, but from 
this morning's Fort Worth Star-Telegram, a very credible newspaper in 
our State. It is the Air and Marine Interdiction and Coordination 
Center. I would suppose that is the same entity that is supposed to be 
monitoring any airplanes that might be coming this way and placing 
American citizens again in harm's way, but they apparently had time, 
according to the newspaper report, and citing as apparently a source 
they talked to, Texas Republican House Speaker Tom Craddick, that they 
had time to provide him with key information.
  It is unusual they would be following a plane from Hale Center, 
Texas, in the Texas Panhandle to Ardmore, Oklahoma, but apparently they 
had time to do that. As the gentleman knows full well as being one of 
the signatories of this letter, our concern is that there is a war on 
terrorism, and that resources would be diverted by Tom DeLay or other 
people away from the war on terrorism, away from fighting crime and 
into politically motivated activity of this nature.
  Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Beaumont, 
Texas (Mr. Lampson).
  Mr. LAMPSON. I am just curious in listening to this and knowing what 
kind of time and cost that that would be, when I know that many of our 
entities, ports along our coastline and many other places in the 
country, are strapped for money, is there any precedent in the history 
of the United States where something like this happened and what 
occurred following that incident?
  Mr. DOGGETT. Of course we have the tragic history of Watergate that 
led to the departure of a President and growing disrespect and cynicism 
of our people as a result of the Watergate scandal, the misuse, the 
invasion of people's personal information, the misuse of Federal law 
enforcement services. That has been one of the concerns that people 
have had as we have given more and more power in our desire to combat 
those who would threaten our families, but giving more and more power 
to John Ashcroft and the people over at the Department of Justice. That 
is why we all write and ask to be assured that they are doing 
everything possible to see that there is no Federal tax dollar involved 
and that there is no diversion, but there would appear that there has 
already been some activity in this area.
  Mr. LAMPSON. And not since the time of Richard Nixon when they 
interfered with a political activity using Federal funds, Federal 
people, Federal employees has something like that occurred until now?
  Mr. DOGGETT. I think it is a sign of desperation, a sign of 
extremism, a sign of the same kind of arrogance that goes to the Texas 
Legislature after the Governor, after the Lieutenant Governor, after 
the Speaker, all Republicans, as well as a number of Republican State 
senators have said, ``We got a lot of problems. We want to focus on 
Texas. We don't need to take up redistricting.'' But now the pressure 
has been put on, the hammer has been applied there to them as 
individuals, and the knife has been pulled out to slice up one 
community after another in our State.
  Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from central Texas 
(Mr. Edwards).
  Mr. EDWARDS. As I understand the article from the Fort Worth Star-
Telegram, the homeland security agency, the responsibility of defending 
American citizens from terrorists here and abroad, they actually took 
taxpayer resources to follow a twin-engine plane from Hale Center, 
Texas, to Ardmore, Oklahoma; is that correct?
  Mr. DOGGETT. They apparently had that information and supplied it to 
the Texas Speaker of the House.
  Mr. EDWARDS. I have not been to Hale Center, Texas, lately. I think I 
recall they have a small cotton gin there. I know they have got maybe a 
drug store, a health center, perhaps known as a center for an al Qaeda 
cell, perhaps?
  Mr. DOGGETT. He is a pretty good farmer up there. Mr. Laney is a 
farmer, a citizen legislator. I doubt there are that many Texans 
outside of west Texas that know precisely where Hale Center is. I do 
not know. Maybe that is why the current Speaker of the House had to 
turn to some Federal agency that is supposed to be protecting us from 
threats to try to find out where Mr. Laney's plane had gone from Hale 
Center.
  Mr. EDWARDS. I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. 
Jackson-Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I thank the distinguished gentleman for 
yielding. I think the news that the distinguished gentleman from 
Austin, Texas, has really reinforced is that not only do we have a 
crisis of the Constitution; be reminded of the 10th amendment that 
clearly delineates an argument that there is absolutely no Federal 
question inasmuch as the 10th amendment protects States from 
intervention on State issues. It has been my knowledge that the 
Republican Party has been champions of what we call states rights and 
lack of Federal intervention.
  So I would like to ask the distinguished gentleman from Austin, 
Texas, we hope that there will be a district that is respectful of the 
people of Austin, Texas, because none of us claim any of these 
districts. Is he suggesting, then, that two things, or three things, 
happened: One, this is the former speaker of the house, my 
understanding, Pete Laney, who, in fact, opened the chambers of the 
house to the newly ascended President of the United States Mr. Bush; 
two, this is the former Pete Laney who has consistently collaborated in 
a bipartisan manner; three, there is speculation that with the inertia, 
sadly, of the work that is not being done here in this Congress on 
homeland security, that there was enough activity to utilize that 
resource?
  And I guess lastly I would say that we have a situation where there 
is seemingly a use of money, might I make it very clear, dollars, 
Federal resources, being utilized for purely political purposes. Is 
that what we seem to have reported or was read in the Fort Worth 
newspaper?
  Mr. DOGGETT. That seems to be what is reported by the Associated 
Press, the comments in the Houston Chronicle, in the Fort Worth Star-
Telegram and in the Washington Times, all of these papers with Mr. 
DeLay as the principal source on most of them himself since he is 
rather proud of the way he projects his power around here. And 
certainly our concern is that resources that are very much needed to 
protect our families not be diverted for a personal political police 
force.

[[Page H4116]]

  Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Green).
  Mr. GREEN of Texas. Let me follow up to that line of questioning to 
my colleagues from Houston and Travis County. I think we all agree that 
we should not use Federal resources committed to the war on terrorism 
and to protecting our homeland to find people who have committed no 
Federal crime and no State crime. There is not a violation of the State 
penal code, and there is no Federal law violation. Not since Richard 
Nixon have we seen such an abuse of the law enforcement authority of 
the Federal Government.
  As far as for most folks, as a Texan, I am proud of my State 
representatives for standing up for what they believe is right. I think 
that is what Texas was all about literally from 1836 to today. I am not 
the only one who thinks they are doing the right thing.
  Monday the Houston Chronicle said, ``If they believe their principles 
are worth fighting for, and they have only one means to fight for them, 
it's difficult to fault them for it, particularly in a fight that was 
thrust upon them by Washington-driven partisan politics.''
  Today the Houston Chronicle said, ``By thwarting DeLay's secretly 
drawn Washington redistricting plan, the House Democrats are preserving 
State prerogatives and doing all Texans a favor.''
  Let me repeat that: ``Doing all Texans a favor.'' I think that is so 
true. That is why here tonight we see so many of us here on the floor 
at one time.
  I want to thank my colleague from northeast Texas. We hope you will 
still be from northeast Texas and the legislature will go about their 
business to deal with school finance, deal with the $10 billion plus 
State deficit, and also with insurance reform, because I know our 
property and casualty insurance are the highest in the country. I thank 
the gentleman and thank all my colleagues for being here this evening.
  Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Doggett).
  Mr. DOGGETT. I want to thank the gentleman for taking the leadership 
on this. This is something that affects more than a few Members of 
Congress or even something as big as the State of Texas. It does affect 
the future of our democracy and whether alternative voices will be 
heard or will instead just be monitored by Federal agencies as they fly 
a plane or travel or engage in their personal lives.
  I cannot help but conclude as I see colleagues from Harris County in 
saying, as the gentlewoman from Harris County pointed out, under the 
DeLay plan my home county, my hometown that I have spent all my life 
in, that I represent 80 percent of the people of now, within a stretch 
of about a mile and a half, there are four congressional districts. One 
connects Lago Vista out on Lake Travis within the city limits of 
Houston, traveling through all the little rural towns in between. 
Another goes a length of about 400 or 500 miles connecting another part 
of Austin, around San Antonio, down the Rio Grande all the way almost 
to the tip of Texas. The other two will trail off in different ways.
  It is the same kind of extremism that tries to bring in the FBI. It 
is the same kind of extremism that hammers the people in the Texas 
Legislature to do the plan that he wants done. And it is the same kind 
of community that is being split asunder, the community that has the 
name of William Barrett Travis on it, who stood there and drew that 
line in the sand at the Alamo. It is that community that is being torn 
in four pieces in a way that is as unfair to the people that are being 
attached to Travis County as it is to the people of Travis County.
  I thank the gentleman and all my colleagues.
  Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to a new Member the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Bell).
  Mr. BELL. I appreciate this opportunity. I would like to first thank 
my good friend from Austin for bringing to light what could have been 
the use of Federal homeland security funds for the purpose of tracking 
a State legislator's plane. Obviously if that proves to be an accurate 
report from the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, I think everyone here, 
probably everyone in the country, would agree that that would be an 
outrageous use of Federal resources, and hopefully there will be a 
complete investigation to get to the bottom of that.
  But while that might top the list of outrageousness on this 
particular evening, I think it is extremely important that we continue 
to remind our fellow Texans and our fellow Americans about what has 
created this particular situation, because going back even several 
months, this entire affair has been extraordinarily outrageous. It 
could have been easily avoided, and there was absolutely no reason for 
it whatsoever.
  This is an unprecedented act in American history. We did research 
early on to find out if any State had chosen to undergo a redistricting 
process simply for partisan reasons long after a census had been taken. 
We found that that had not occurred in some 50 years, and if I am 
incorrect on that, I am sure my good friend the gentleman from Dallas, 
Texas, (Mr. Frost) will correct me because he was the one who was kind 
enough to have the research performed. But it has not taken place, 
because that is when redistricting occurs in the United States, after a 
census, after we can look at how the population has shifted and how the 
lines should be drawn.
  But Mr. DeLay has said that because he is the majority leader, he 
wants more seats. He worked very hard to make sure the majority would 
change in the State House of Representatives and so he decided to use 
his heavy-handed tactics and force this power grab, this unprecedented 
action.
  When I was back home in my district over the course of the last few 
days, people said, well, Texas is a majority Republican State now; is 
it not? So should it not have a majority congressional delegation? I 
think it is very important that we make that very clear tonight and set 
the facts forward here this evening.
  Because of the way our Texas congressional districts are drawn, there 
are a majority of Republican districts in the State of Texas. In fact, 
there are 20 Republican districts and only 12 Democratic districts. You 
might be scratching your head because you have heard there is a 
Democratic majority. Yes, there are 17 Democratic Representatives from 
Texas and only 15 Republicans. Why? Because in five of those 
Republican-dominated districts, the voters have decided that they would 
prefer the Democratic Representatives to serve them in the United 
States House of Representatives. That is the way democracy works in 
America, ladies and gentlemen, and that is the way democracy works in 
Texas, or at least it did work that way until the majority leader 
decided that because he is the majority leader, and this is his quote, 
that he wants more seats.
  This comes at a time when the State of Texas is facing a 10- to $12 
billion budget deficit, when we are dealing with school finance, 
Medicaid funding, a children's health insurance program, serious 
issues, serious issues that are deserving of our State lawmakers' 
attention. But even in light of all of that, our majority leader 
decided to force their hand and go forward with redistricting. That is 
what brings us here tonight.

                              {time}  2000

  And that is what caused our representatives in the State House of 
Representatives to go to Ardmore, Oklahoma.
  Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Bell).
  Let me say before the gentleman from Austin leaves the Chamber, we 
appreciate his leadership in working on the issue of the misuse of 
Federal Government assets for intimidation and for political use, and I 
would also like to point out before yielding that this is also 
happening, as we know, at the State level with the use of State assets 
for political purposes. One of the State representatives in Texas, one 
of the heroes helping break the quorum is Representative Craig Eiland. 
Unfortunately, Representative Craig Eiland's wife was in the hospital, 
and they had premature twins. The twins are patients in the neonatal 
intensive care unit. The hypocritical speaker of the Texas House, Tom 
Craddick, sent investigators, sent the Texas Rangers, to the hospital 
to interview the nurses,

[[Page H4117]]

blasting into the neonatal unit to find out where in the world are the 
State legislators. And everyone in America knew where they were because 
it was on the television. They were in Ardmore, Oklahoma.
  One of the State representatives from my district, not only a great 
State representative but a personal friend of mine, Chuck Hopson, his 
wife was in Austin and determined to go home. She left Austin to go to 
Jacksonville, Texas, probably about 4 hours. Upon leaving Austin, Tom 
Craddick put DPS officers on her tail and followed her 4 hours to 
Jacksonville, Texas, all the way. When she slowed down, they slowed 
down. When she speed up, they sped up. When she pulled over, they 
pulled over. This is getting dangerously close to a police State. That 
is improper. There was no allegation of breaking the law. There were no 
criminal allegations, no civil allegations; but we are using the power 
of the State to intimidate free citizens of the State of Texas.
  And I have got a question. I want to know from Tom Craddick how many 
men he is following around in those cars. I want to know how many 
investigators he is putting on the men in Texas. I want to know why he 
is determined to try to intimidate the wives of our State 
representatives and using State assets and State funding to do that.
  Mr. LAMPSON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SANDLIN. I yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. LAMPSON. The gentleman spoke of Craig Eiland, who is one of my 
constituents, Craig and Melissa; and their prematurely born twins are 
doing well in the hospital, thank goodness, but the night that those 
Department of Public Safety officers showed up in the hospital 
questioning the nurses that were taking care of those babies concerned 
Melissa significantly so, and then following that they went to her home 
to question her when it had already been announced, as the gentleman 
said, that they knew Craig Eiland was in Ardmore, Oklahoma, as did the 
rest of the country.
  That is bordering on harassment, but it is also the use of public 
funds and public employees to perform tasks, as the gentleman says, 
reminiscent of a police state. But what about the work that the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost) did recently on the AMBER Alert? I 
have done a lot of work in my 6 years here about the issue of missing 
and exploited children and worked diligently to pass legislation that 
would give our law enforcement capability to work with the public of 
this country to help find missing people. Interestingly enough, I 
understand that the State of Texas turned on the AMBER Alert system to 
try to find members of the Texas legislature. Can anybody answer that? 
Is that the truth, Mr. Frost? Do you know that? Or Mr. Sandlin?
  Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Speaker, I believe that is the truth, and I guess 
they are treating them as exploited children. I do not know, but it is 
clearly a misuse of the purpose of that notification center. It is 
absolutely outrageous; and as the gentleman knows from his leadership 
in the Caucus for Missing and Exploited Children, this Congress and the 
statehouse in Texas has worked very hard to help identify missing and 
exploited children, children that are away from their parents, and the 
assets and the energies of the AMBER Alert system are to do just that, 
not to find adult legislators, number one; and, number two, certainly 
not when everyone in the whole country knows exactly where they are.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SANDLIN. I yield to the gentleman from Dallas (Mr. Frost).
  Mr. FROST. I do want to answer the question, and then I do want to 
talk about one other item. As far as we can determine, that is exactly 
what they did. They activated the AMBER Alert, posting the information 
on the DPS Web site, clearly an abuse of that system that we worked so 
hard to get in place to help missing and exploited children.
  I would like to call the public's attention and the Speaker's 
attention to something that is far worse than what they did with AMBER 
Alert. Thirty years ago I was a young man. I remember following this in 
the news. Thirty years ago President Richard Nixon tried to use the FBI 
and the CIA to get involved in the Watergate issue. That was widely 
reported in the press of this country. It was an abuse of power by the 
President of the United States and is one of the things that led to 
President Nixon's ultimate resignation. Now we have reports in the 
Texas papers, in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, the Houston Chronicle, 
the Associated Press, that Tom DeLay attempted to use the FBI in this 
situation to intervene in a domestic political matter.
  I remember when Nixon did this, Republicans were outraged. I remember 
when Barry Goldwater, a conservative Republican, went to the White 
House and said to Richard Nixon enough, enough, and urged him to 
resign.
  I would urge Republicans, my Republican colleagues here in Washington 
and Republicans around the country, to tell Tom DeLay, as Barry 
Goldwater told Richard Nixon, this is not the kind of country we have. 
Tell Tom DeLay he cannot use the FBI to further domestic political 
agendas in this country.
  As far as we have been able to tell and as far as the newspapers of 
the State have been able to tell, the FBI did the right thing and they 
refused, they refused to be involved in domestic politics, and I 
applaud that. Tell Tom DeLay, anyone who is watching this on 
television, whether you are a Democrat or a Republican or an 
independent, that the greatness of America is the freedoms that we 
enjoy. May we never become a police state. May we never become a 
society where the FBI is used against political dissenters in this 
country. It is time to put this to an end. And if Tom DeLay continues 
in this matter, continues trying to abuse our political system, then 
maybe there are some people in this country including Republicans who 
should go to him and say, Mr. DeLay, it is time to step aside as 
majority leader. You are no better than Richard Nixon; and I regret the 
fact, Tom DeLay, that you are from the State of Texas and that you are 
emulating Richard Nixon and what he did 30 years ago. I yield back to 
the gentleman.
  Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. Along this same 
line, I would like to point out that all of us here completely support 
law enforcement, the Texas Rangers, the Department of Public Safety, 
our police; but they are acting under the direction of a misguided and 
a wrong-headed speaker of the House in Texas, Tom Craddick, in 
conjunction with the majority leader here, the two Toms, the Tom Toms, 
and they are beating drums, sending these folks out. And our Department 
of Public Safety folks, they have little choice of what to do.
  But let me bring out a couple of other things that have happened. El 
Paso Police entered the home of Representative Joe Pickett where his 
17-year-old daughter was at home alone, and his wife, who was a block 
away, quickly returned to the house. Representative Joe Menendez's wife 
found her car vandalized, parked right in front of the governor's 
mansion. A senior staff member, and this is particularly troublesome to 
those of us who protect the Constitution, a senior staff member of 
Representative Elliott Naishtat's office was told it was a felony to 
withhold information on the whereabouts of that legislator, and when 
asked what law was broken, the staff member was shown a copy of the 
House rules.
  Police searched Representative Patrick Rose's car, which was left at 
a friend's house hours after the lawmakers were found in Ardmore, 
Oklahoma. The friends said law enforcement had staked out the house 
where the car was parked prior to the search.
  Listen to what the Corpus Christi Caller-Times said: ``The wife of 
State Representative Jaime Capelo, Democrat, Corpus Christi, looked out 
her kitchen window Tuesday and noticed a blue four-door vehicle driving 
past. The driver looked at her home as he passed. The vehicle pulled up 
next to a white Chevrolet pickup parked down the street. `I asked him 
why he was watching my house.' The man identified himself as a State 
trooper and told her that officials in Austin had called his office and 
told the troopers to follow her.'' Told the troopers to follow her. 
This is nothing but police state activity. It is something that we 
should be concerned about.


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Mario Diaz-Balart of Florida). The

[[Page H4118]]

Chair would remind the Members to address their remarks to the Chair 
and not to the television audience.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SANDLIN. I yield to the gentlewoman from Houston (Ms. Jackson-Lee 
of Texas).
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished 
gentleman for yielding.
  I think it is important to capture the intensity of what we are 
trying to discuss. This is not an ordinary circumstance. This is an 
extraordinary circumstance. We have already gone on the question of the 
utilization of Federal resources. We have already gone on or discussed 
the idea of the very sensitive legislative initiative that took years 
in the making, the AMBER Alert. Then we add to that the insult of 
tracking and stalking family members to the extra added insult of the 
representation that the PATRIOT Act could be the underpinnings of 
Federal intervention and/or arrests of these members.
  In questioning both the Department of Justice and the U.S. Marshal 
today in the Committee on the Judiciary, I am grateful to report that 
they were as dumbfounded as the questioner. Would they have any 
authority to either arrest and/or seek these members? To those 
questions there was a resounding no answer, and certainly there was an 
answer of not having any idea of their authority to do so.
  But I want to just make this point. The reason why this is so 
extraordinary is because we have had the Killer Bees. In fact, Speaker 
Craddick some few years ago, 1971, 30 members disappeared during the 
1971 session. Craddick was part of it, and they were called the ``Dirty 
30.'' And they were protesting what I think was a positive protest to 
clean up the State of Texas with respect to the Shawtown scandal. 
Hooray for them. It is equal to the very act that has occurred by these 
50, but do my colleagues know what? There is no evidence, none 
whatsoever, that any Federal authority was sought, that any family 
members were abused, that any hospitals were visited, that any 
inquiries were made because of sick family members, that any children 
were intimidated. None of this occurred.
  And so, Mr. Speaker, this is why we are on the floor of the House. 
Not because there is not more important business to do in this Congress 
or in the State legislature. But we want to remind America and the 
State of Texas that the reason why these 51, 53 are standing tall is 
because this is an extraordinary and outrageous action that is 
occurring by the Speaker of the House in Texas and of course the 
leadership of this body.
  Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from San Antonio 
(Mr. Gonzalez).

                              {time}  2015

  Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I know we have gone over some matters that have 
transpired in the State of Texas that should shock the conscience of 
any American citizen.
  What are we talking about, because I know we have alluded to it, and 
maybe it may have been read into the Record earlier, but I would like 
to revisit it and use the very quotes from Mr. Craddick and the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay) as they appear in the Fort Worth Star-
Telegram. This is from the newspaper article.
  ``At the Capitol in Washington, United States House Majority Leader 
Tom DeLay said that the speaker of the Texas House in Austin, Tom 
Craddick, had asked for the FBI or U.S. marshals to intervene. `The 
Speaker asked the FBI and/or U.S. marshals to go up and get these 
Members,' DeLay told the reporters.
  ``But Craddick, who a day earlier had suggested the possibility of 
Federal involvement, said Tuesday that he made no calls to any Federal 
agencies, saying that it was an issue for the Department of Public 
Safety in Texas. He said, `I'm not into that.'
  ``However, a spokesman for the United States Attorney's Office,'' in 
my hometown of San Antonio, ``had no official comment, but a source 
confirmed that an unidentified person had called to inquire about 
federalizing the arrest warrant.
  ``The point seems moot now,'' a spokesman for the U.S. Department of 
Justice said, ``because it definitely is not for the Federal 
authorities. However, one Federal agency that became involved early on 
was the Air and Marine Interdiction and Coordination Center based in 
Riverside, California, which now falls under the auspices of the 
Homeland Security Department.
  ``The agency received a call to locate a specific Piper turboprop 
aircraft. It was determined the plane belonged to former House speaker 
Pete Laney, Democrat from Hale Center, Texas.
  ``The location of Laney's plane proved to be a key piece of 
information because, Craddick said, it's how he determined that the 
Democrats were in Oklahoma. `We called someone, and they said they were 
going to track it. I have no idea how they tracked it down,' Craddick 
said. `However, that is how we found them.'''
  So we know there were Federal funds, Federal personnel used, 
definitely for an improper purpose if not for an illegal act.
  We will get to the bottom of this. But what has spurred all this on? 
When they could not get the Federal authorities to go and arrest these 
individual members, our great Governor of Texas, Rick Perry, contacted 
the attorney general in New Mexico, because they thought that is where 
they were going.
  New Mexico Attorney General Patricia Madrid responded today to a 
request from Governor Rick Perry's office to allow Texas officials to 
make arrests in her State. ``My office is researching the issue. It 
appears the short answer is no. Texas, as all other States, must first 
issue a valid arrest warrant upon which New Mexico officials may act 
and make an arrest, and then extradition procedures will apply to 
remove the person arrested to Texas.''
  That can never happen, because we do not have a criminal act. No 
warrant is going to be issued, we know that, but, nevertheless, the 
Governor of Texas had the audacity to make that kind of request.
  Now, how did the attorney general handle it in New Mexico? She ended 
it with this quote: ``Nevertheless, I have put out an all-points 
bulletin for law enforcement to be on the look out for politicians in 
favor of health care for the needy and against tax cuts for the 
wealthy.''
  Because that is really what it comes down to. At the beginning of 
this process, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay) and other members of 
the Republican leadership were telling Texans that their plan would 
create new minority districts. This was not about partisan politics and 
more Republicans and getting rid of Democrats, it was about doing the 
lofty and admirable thing of adding minority districts.
  Well, the map is out there, 1 of 10, but all 10 do not create 
minority districts.
  Last week the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay) finally admitted, 
``Hey, look, I am a Republican. The purpose of all this is to get more 
Republicans.''
  So now the mask is off, and that is where we are today. We have an 
abuse of the legislative process for partisan gain. It is the worst 
thing that could ever happen. It is practiced day in and day out in the 
Capitol of the United States, and they are attempting to export it to 
the State of Texas, and we have 53 brave and courageous State 
legislators saying, no, thank you, and do not mess with Texas.
  Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Beaumont, 
Texas (Mr. Lampson).
  Mr. LAMPSON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for putting together 
this Special Order and giving us the opportunity to come and express 
some of the concerns about what is happening in Texas with a number of 
issues, redistricting being one of them.
  We have heard a great deal about an abuse of power. But what was it 
all about? It was about someone who stepped in and tried to control 
Texas from outside of Texas, and that someone happened to be a Texan, 
but who holds a very high position as one of our colleagues here in 
this body, the majority leader of the House of Representatives, the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay).
  I find it absolutely amazing that our friends in Texas and some of 
our constituents in Texas who serve in the Texas House of 
Representatives have been able to choose to stand up in the manner in 
which they have; people like

[[Page H4119]]

Craig Eiland, whose wife was harassed by the Texas troopers, and people 
like Alan Ritter and Joe Deshotel, who took time away from their 
families to go away to Ardmore, Oklahoma, and to exhibit a protest.
  And shame on those who have said that those people are turning their 
backs on their jobs and turning their backs on their constituents and 
not wanting to go back and address the problems of the State of Texas. 
That is nonsense, it is offending, because these people to want to go 
back, they do want to go back and do their jobs, and they do want to 
address the critical problems that face Texas today, whether it deals 
with financing of our education system, which is in dire straits, 
whether it is the health needs, or the significant deficit that Texas 
faces of $10 billion to $12 billion, and they will do so as soon as the 
speaker of the Texas House of Representatives agrees to get rid of 
these nonpriority, personal political agenda items so that we can 
address the real needs of the State of Texas.
  I had a newsperson ask me today, Mr. Speaker, whether or not the 
people of Texas could be controlled by one person, and whether the 
Texas House of Representatives could be controlled by one person. I am 
thrilled to be able to say no, that it cannot be.
  Yes, the Republicans may win on this issue in Austin, Texas, but we 
will raise every objection that we can possibly raise. And they may win 
in the Senate, and we will raise that objection again. And they may win 
in the courts, but we will be right there. And the sad part of it is 
that the people of Texas will pay over and over again with the costs 
that are going to be associated with legal assistance and defending 
this issue and the huge amount of time and effort that is going to be 
taken away from our need to address the real issues of Texas.

  God bless those Texas legislators. We are proud of every one of you, 
and know you are going to do the Lord's work for all of us in Texas, 
and we will get to the bottom of it, and the people of Texas in the end 
will win.
  Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I yield to the 
gentleman from Houston (Mr. Bell).
  Mr. BELL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I think it is very important as we discuss this 
important subject that we recall some historical perspective. My good 
friend from Harris County referred to some recent history just a short 
while ago in which he pointed out some of the hypocrisy of the current 
speaker of the Texas House.
  It is also interesting to go back to the year 1984. The reason I 
think it is interesting is because a lot of people in the last few days 
have said, is this not just politics as usual? Is this not just what 
happens in the State of Texas?
  Well, quite honestly, it is not. If you go back to the year 1984, 
that was the year that our current majority leader, the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. DeLay), and five other Republicans were elected. It was an 
unprecedented success on the Republican side.
  Interestingly, in 1984 the majority leader of this body, the United 
States House of Representatives, was none other than Jim Wright, a 
Democrat from Fort Worth, Texas. In the State House of Representatives, 
there was a strong Democratic majority, in the State Senate of Texas 
there was a strong Democratic majority. But in that year there was 
absolutely no effort made whatsoever to go back and redistrict and 
change those seats from whence the six representatives, the six 
Republican representatives, had been elected, because, quite simply, 
that is just not the way things have been done.
  As we come to a close tonight, I want to go back to the Houston 
Chronicle editorial that my good friend the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Green) referred to earlier, because I think it makes a very eloquent 
case about what we have witnessed this week.
  In its closing, perhaps the most valid criticism that could be made 
of the missing Democrats is that ``their place is in the capital, doing 
the people's business and debating the issues, win, lose or draw. In a 
more civil era that would be right. But Speaker Craddick throughout the 
session has discouraged debate, opposition amendments and all of the 
other give and take of politics. On many occasions, he and his 
lieutenants seem to regard examination and principal discussion of 
legislation as irritants. It is not too late to salvage the legislative 
session. It is past time, however, for Governor Perry, Speaker 
Craddick, Majority Leader DeLay, et al., to follow George W. Bush's 
gubernatorial example, and realize that good government is bipartisan 
government, shaped by compromise, and the broad public interest.''
  Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Houston, 
Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, let me just quickly say that 
there has been a representation that this meat cutter of a plan by the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay) protects minorities and supports the 
Voting Rights Act of 1965.
  Let me clearly say, Mr. Speaker, that that was an emotional time in 
our history. It was a time when there were deaths in Philadelphia, 
Mississippi; it was a time when the State troopers attacked peaceful 
marchers crossing the Edmund Pettis Bridge in Selma, Alabama, on March 
7, 1965; it was a time when there was great intenseness in the United 
States Congress to be able to pass a Voting Rights Act of 1965.
  This district, this plan, does not represent, commemorate or give 
honor to the Voting Rights Act of 1965. This plan is a sham, it is a 
shame, when it takes away the historic birthplace of Barbara Jordan out 
of the 18th Congressional District. All I can do is remind this body of 
the words of Barbara Jordan during the impeachment proceedings of 
Richard Nixon, that she would refuse to be diminished, and that she 
spoke for the people of the United States of America, and that she 
reinforced her belief in the Constitution.
  This is a sham of a process. This Congress should be ashamed, the 
State legislature in Texas should be ashamed, we all should be ashamed, 
and we should get back to the business in celebration, commemoration in 
honor of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

                          ____________________