Congressional Record, Volume 152 Issue 37 (Wednesday, March 29, 2006)

[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 37 (Wednesday, March 29, 2006)]
[House]
[Pages H1312-H1318]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

OFFICIAL TRUTH SQUAD

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Poe). Under the Speaker's announced
policy of January 4, 2005, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price) is
recognized for 60 minutes.
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, what a pleasure it is to come back
to the floor tonight to discuss some issues of vital concern to Members
of the House and all Americans.
I could not help but pick up on what the gentlewoman from California
was saying just a moment ago about a number of issues. One of them was
about Medicare Part D. We are going to talk about a lot of things
tonight, but I want to start by talking about Medicare Part D.
I am a physician. I practiced orthopedic surgery for over 20 years in
the Atlanta area. She mentioned there was a plan to delay or postpone
the deadline for Medicare Part D which is the prescription drug formula
for seniors. Nearly 28 million out of 42 million have already signed
up. Many of them are finally getting medications for the first time.
She mentioned there was a plan to delay it and they could not get
bipartisan support. I guess that is one of the things that brings me to
this well almost night after night because what you hear down here just
is not so. It is not the truth.
Mr. Speaker, I am one of those who also believes that there ought to
be an extension of that deadline. In fact, we have had a bill on that
for over a year and we could not get a soul, not a soul on the other
side of the aisle to support that bill. The reason for that is what
brought about the Official Truth Squad.
The Official Truth Squad began with a group of freshmen Republicans
who came here after the 2004 election to be Members of Congress and
came here with wonderful vision and enthusiasm and positive spirit. And
what we were met with oftentimes from the other side was really
vitriol, was personal attacks, was a distortion of the truth,
misinformation, disinformation.
We had been meeting on a weekly basis as a group and so we got
together and we said how can we counter that. Because when I go home, I
know that is what concerns many of my constituents. I suspect that is
what you hear, Mr. Speaker, back at home. People ask why the level of
rancor and why the level of partisanship.
What we thought to do in an effort to try to raise the level of
discourse and decrease the kind of partisanship that goes on is to talk
about truth, talk about issues in an open and honest manner and in a
way that sheds light on issues.
Tonight you have heard an awful lot already about various issues, Mr.
Speaker, that frankly have not been treated with the light of the day,
if you will.

{time} 2145

And so we have adopted, the Official Truth Squad has adopted a saying
or a quote from a wonderful former United States Senator, Daniel
Patrick Moynihan from New York, and he kind of crystallized what our
frustration was, and that is, everyone is entitled to their own
opinion, but not their own facts. And so often around here, what
happens is that people's opinion gets mistaken for facts. In fact, it
has been said that if somebody says something three times in
Washington, they think it is the truth, regardless of whether or not it
has any bearing on the truth. And so I want to touch on a couple of
things before we get into our other issue tonight, and I want to talk a
little about student loans, student aid. We are now dealing this week
on the Higher Education Reauthorization bill in the United States House
of Representatives. It is a bill that has to be adopted in order to
continue the programs that are so vitally important to millions,
millions of young people across this country in order to go to college
and university and to better themselves and make a better life for both
them and their family. And what you always hear from the other side,
what you always hear is, oh, they are going to cut this, and they are
going to cut that, and they are going to slash this, and they are going
to slash that. And that is what we have heard tonight, Mr. Speaker.
But the Official Truth Squad has as a mission to shed the light of
day on it and to talk about the truth. And I am fond of charts and
posters, because I think that they really describe much more than I am
able to do in word. And this chart here, this poster here demonstrates
the increases, Mr. Speaker, I said, increases, not cuts, not slashes, I
said increases in Federal student aid over the last 10 years. And
anybody can plainly see that the amount of Federal loans, the amount of
Federal grants, the amount of education tax benefits, the amount of
Federal work study, all of them, all of them, Mr. Speaker, over the
last 10 years rising year after year after year, and appropriately so,
so young people can have an opportunity to realize the American dream.
That is the positive issue. That is the real message. That is the
truth. These numbers, these numbers don't lie. And so when you hear
people talk about cuts or slashes, Mr. Speaker, I am sorry to say that
it just is really a fabrication. It is not the truth. It is not what is
real. And you will hear them talk about Pell Grants. Pell Grants are
the grants that the Federal Government provides for young people in
order to go to colleges and universities, those young people who don't
necessarily have the means to be able to afford it. It is a wonderful
program, works extremely well, allows people to elevate themselves and
really raise themselves up by their own boot straps. This is a telling
graph, Mr. Speaker. This is a telling chart because it begins way back
in 1986. And the yellow portion of this is when the Democrats were in
control of the United States House of Representatives. And you will
hear all about what they would do if they were able to control again.
And I think it is important and instructive for the House of
Representatives and for the American people to appreciate, well, don't
tell me what you would do. Let us look at what you did. Let us look at
the truth. And the truth, in fact, Mr. Speaker, is that Pell Grants
provided for by the Federal Government for young individuals who are
the most needy in our society in order to go to colleges and
universities in fact were flat or decreased in the 10 years prior to
1996. And what has happened since then is an appropriate increase to be
able to fund a program that allows young people, without means, to be
able to go to colleges and universities. The red portion is what has
happened under the Republican control of the United States House of
Representatives. Mr. Speaker, those are not cuts. Those are not
slashes. They are appropriate increases in a program that helps young
people who are most in need.
This is another chart that demonstrates what would happen in the next
fiscal year, what would happen with the overall Pell Grant funding.
This is 2000, 2006. And with increased budgeting, the next graph, 2000
again, and Fiscal Year 2007 would increase from $4,050 per individual
to $5,050, a significant remarkable increase. And on the end, the
number of Pell Grants recipients, the number of students being helped,
3.9 million in 2000, fiscal year 2007, 5.3 million individuals. This is
not a decrease. These are not cuts. These are not slashes. And for
anybody to say otherwise is just, it is not true. It is not honest. It
doesn't do a credit to the debate. It does a disservice to all

[[Page H1313]]

Americans because it means that people aren't able to make appropriate
decisions because they are not being given appropriate or accurate
information.
And then, one final one on education that I just felt compelled to
bring to the House this evening is the annual growth in education,
Federal moneys for education over the last 5 years. Total education,
remember, Mr. Speaker, what the mantra is out there is that there are
being cuts and slashes in education programs all across this Nation. In
fact, what has happened over the last 5 years, from 2000 to 2005, total
education spending up an average of 9.1 percent. What we have done is
required greater accountability. What we have done is said, if you are
going to get Federal money, then you need to do a particular job and
you need to make certain that you are doing it, and we need to make
certain that you are doing that as well and having student
accomplishment, that is what we have required. And so I think it is
imperative that as we talk about issue after issue after issue here in
Washington, and that when the American people listen and they pay
attention to what we are doing, that they appreciate and understand and
recognize that truth is important to the discussion, and that if we
don't start with truth, we can't reach the right conclusion at all.
There are a number of other issues that have been talked about this
evening and repeatedly over the past couple of months, one of them is
the issue of Medicaid, something that is near and dear to my heart as a
physician. I treated patients from all across the economic spectrum and
understood that an individual's means didn't make a difference about
how we cared for them. And so I take really a personal affront when
individuals talk about slashing and cutting a program that is so vital
to people who need to be able to access the health care system. And the
Medicaid system is one of those that really irritates me when I hear
people talk about it on the other side of the aisle, when they talk
about these cuts and slashes that they describe, because it just is
disingenuous and it does a disservice to the debate. And it does so
because it is not the truth. It is not the truth. And these are the
actual numbers, Mr. Speaker: 1995, $89 billion in Federal money being
put out for Medicaid. And you can see the line, Mr. Speaker. It is a
continual increase over the last 10 years. And it is an appropriate
increase because we have covered more individuals. And it is an
appropriate increase because it recognized that individuals in the
Medicaid system needed to have access to the highest quality medical
care. And so the average growth over the last 10 years, 7.4 percent per
year. 7.4 percent per year. Mr. Speaker, it is not a cut. It is not a
slash. That is an appropriate increase in a program that is caring for
the most needy in our society, from $89 billion in 1995 to $181 billion
in 2005.
We hear a lot of talk about what the quote cuts and slashes are going
to do to our society. This is a difficult graph to tell the difference
because this shows what the projected spending is over the next 5 years
in the mandatory or automatic programs that we have which are Social
Security, Medicare and Medicaid, three programs that the other side
likes to talk about a lot because they talk about how the cuts in
spending will wreak havoc in our society.

Mr. Speaker, I think it is imperative that folks look at this all
across this House chamber and appreciate that the difference between
the baseline, which is the green line, and the administration proposal,
which is full of all these remarkable changes that the other side
alleges, is a difference in a 5.3 percent growth that is projected,
which is part of the plan that has been adopted or recognized over the
past number of years, but when economic situations change, and when it
is important to get a handle on the amount of Federal spending and be
fiscally responsible, the change that has been recommended by the
President is a 5.1 percent a year growth over the next 5 years. That is
right, Mr. Speaker. You heard correctly. All of the demagoguery about
these programs, all of the negative comments about these programs, all
of the personal attacks about these programs that do a disservice to
our entire Nation and are simply untrue are all about the difference
between the green line and the red line, a difference between 5.3
percent growth annually over the next 5 years and 5.1 percent growth
over the next 5 years. So I would suggest to our friends on the other
side of the aisle that it would be much more helpful to be positive, to
be open to collegial activity, to bring solutions to the table, to talk
about how we can best help individuals to help themselves all across
our society, and not be so negative and demagogue every single issue
that makes it so it is incredibly difficult to tell exactly what the
truth is and where we are going.
You oftentimes hear them talk about the tax cuts for the wealthy and
how that will decrease the amount of money coming into the Federal
Government and how it will make it so that we can't fund the kinds of
programs that we need. Well, President Kennedy knew something very,
very brilliant and President Reagan knew the same thing and President
Bush learned well, and that is that tax cuts don't decrease revenue to
the Federal Government. They increase revenue to the Federal
Government. And I know that sounds kind of contradictory, or that it is
kind of counterintuitive. But in fact, that is what happens, and this
chart shows that extremely well. In 2000, this is the level of revenue
coming into the Federal Government under previous administration
policies. And what happened, and you see that the line is decreasing
because of the recession that we are in, the dotcom bubble burst and 9/
11 occurred. And by 2003, we were on a pretty steady slope down.
Now, what happened in 2003 with the vertical green dotted line there,
what happened is that the tax decreases. The appropriate fair tax
decreases of this administration and of the Republican Congress went
into effect. And then what you see happen is the tax receipts to the
Federal Government increase significantly. In fact, they increase so
much that in 2005 they were significantly greater than in 2000. Tax
revenue increasing because of tax cuts. And why is that? Well, it is
because people have more of their own money in their pocket. And what
do they do with that money? They save it so that it can be invested, or
they spend it so that this increases the economy and the economy booms.
And that is what has happened. So when you decrease taxes,
appropriately, fairly, judiciously, the truth is that what the Federal
Government receives is an increase in tax revenue. So when you hear
these folks talk about their plan, their plan to save this or their
plan to save that, and most often you won't have them tell you exactly
what they are going to do. One of them slipped out yesterday. I was
listening to him on the floor. And he said, quote, we will have to,
quote, raise revenue somewhere else, unquote. Raise revenue somewhere
else. Now, what does that mean? What does raising revenue somewhere
else mean to folks on the other side? Well, you know what it means, Mr.
Speaker. It means raising taxes. It means raising taxes. We have a
wonderful opportunity in this Congress to make certain that the tax
decreases, the fair tax decreases of this administration and the United
States House of Representatives and Senate, that they adopted ought to
be made permanent, especially the death tax, the inheritance tax which
is so destructive to small businesses and to families all across this
Nation. They ought to be made permanent.
And one final poster on revenue and on tax growth, because it
projects out to 2011. And that is that as long as the tax decreases,
the fair tax decreases are continued, what happens over the next 5
years is that the Federal revenue stream continues to increase. Now,
again, I know that seems counterintuitive. That seems like it doesn't
make sense. If you decrease fairly the tax liability of individuals all
across this Nation, you might think, well, then the revenue coming into
the Federal Government is not going to be as much. But in fact what
happens is that the revenue to the Federal Government increases
significantly. And it increases because when you put more money in the
back pockets of men and women across this Nation, what happens is that
they save it and they invest it and they spend it when they want to,
and what that means is that you get significant economic growth.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I have gone a little longer than I had anticipated
on the

[[Page H1314]]

issue of the economy, but I think it is incredibly important because,
as a Member of the Official Truth Squad, what we are interested in
doing is bringing truth to issues, all issues, economic issues and an
issue of national security that we are going to talk about tonight
because when you think about it, the issue of truth and national
security, probably nothing could be more important in terms of talking
about truth when you are talking about national security.

{time} 2200

I mentioned that I am a physician, and if I am taking care of a
patient, if I do not have truthful information from that patient, I
cannot reach the right diagnosis. I cannot make the right diagnosis.
And if I cannot make the right diagnosis, then I cannot treat the right
disease. And if I cannot treat the right disease, then the patient does
not get well.
And the same is true for our national policy. If we are not talking
truthfully about the issue, if we are not openly and honestly
discussing the issue, then we cannot make the right diagnosis. We
cannot figure out what the right problem is. And if we cannot figure
out what the right problem is, then we cannot propose the right
solution. And if we cannot propose the right solution, then never on
the face of the Earth in this body will the right solution come about.
It just does not happen by happenstance. So truth is so incredibly
important when you talk about national security because the
consequences of not talking about the truth in the area of national
security are probably greater than anything else. Our obligation as
Members of Congress and Federal representatives is to make certain that
we protect our citizens, that we protect our Nation.
And so we would like to talk a little bit this evening, as the
Official Truth Squad, about national security. One of those areas of
national security is border security. It has gotten a lot of attention
the past couple of weeks and certainly coming to a head this week as
the Senate addresses the issue of illegal immigration. But I am one of
those who join my colleagues in believing that if our border is not
secure, then our Nation is not secure. And so I am pleased to be joined
tonight by a number of colleagues.
First, I would like to welcome and introduce Congresswoman Thelma
Drake from the great State of Virginia. Congresswoman Drake is a member
of the Official Truth Squad and a member of the freshman class and just
a great individual who recognizes and appreciates the importance of
national security, who has done yeoman's work in the area of assisting
our armed services, Armed Forces, and is going to talk a little bit
tonight about border security.
So, Congresswoman Drake, I thank you so much for coming and look
forward to your comments.
Mrs. DRAKE. I would certainly like to thank you for giving me the
opportunity to join you this evening to talk about something that is so
critical to our Nation.
And before I go into the issue of border security, I just want to
comment a moment on what you started out with, and that is Medicare
part D. First of all, you and I are freshmen; so we were not in
Congress in 2003 when the very largest change to Medicare took place,
but I know that both of us have been committed to making sure that
citizens in our district understand what this new benefit is for them.
And I think it is important just to tell America where we are today,
that there are 42 million Americans who qualify for Medicare.
Remember, anyone who is eligible for Medicare and is receiving
Medicare is eligible for this new benefit. As of today, 28 million of
those have signed up for coverage. The expected figure by May 15 is 30
million people, and there are 6 million people that have been
identified that will not need to sign up because they are military
retirees, Federal retirees, State retirees, or have other programs.
That is going to leave us on May 15 with 6 million Americans that we
have not reached. So I think it is important to talk about it so that
our seniors understand what a wonderful benefit this is.
What I have learned in my district is when I talk about Medicare part
D as being a private sector insurance product with a reduced premium,
then all the rest of it makes sense, that they have choices. It is a
voluntary program and gives them, as you have already said, the ability
to have prescription drug coverage, which many of them have not had in
the past.
So I want to thank you for talking about Medicare part D, and I know
the work that you have done in your district as well to make sure that
our seniors know and they make the best decisions for them.
But what I wanted to talk about tonight is the Border Protection,
Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act. That is the name of
the bill that we passed in December of 2005 in this House.
Unfortunately, at that time there was not any press coverage about
that bill. We really were not hearing about it until the Senate took
the bill up about a week or so ago.
I know that you and I share the same belief, that the very first step
in any debate about immigration reform is the very first debate which
has to be secure our borders. We believe that our country must be open
for trade, tourism, and legal immigration and closed to terrorists,
drug dealers, and criminals. But the bill that passed in December, and
I think it is important for America to know, a lot of the components
that were in that bill, things such as an employment verification
system where employers would be required to check Social Security
numbers with Social Security and Department of Homeland Security, today
that exists, but it is simply a voluntary program, and we all know the
stories about fraudulent documents that are out there.
Increased penalties for alien smuggling, mandatory minimum sentences
and increased penalties. A crackdown on alien, either legal or illegal,
gang members. They would now be inadmissible and deportable, and our
Attorney General can designate certain groups as gang members. It also
bans benefits for alien gang members, stiffer penalties for aliens who
enter after being removed. It bars aliens with aggravated felony
convictions from receiving green cards.
There is now cooperation and reimbursement between our border
sheriffs and our Federal law enforcement to reimburse them for the work
that they are doing for us. Increased authority for the Department of
Homeland Security to detain dangerous aliens. Our courts have
prohibited this in the past, and the result is that dangerous aliens
have been released. It also provides for the removal of these aliens.
It bars terrorist aliens from naturalization. There is increased
security for our borders with both military support and Department of
Defense surveillance. It requires a comprehensive risk assessment of
our ports and land and maritime borders and radiation detection
devices. Increased inspectors, 1,000 over a 4-year period, and an
additional 1,500 K-9 units over the next 5 years.
Physical barriers, state-of-the-art surveillance technology,
including cameras, radar, satellites, and unmanned aerial vehicles. It
eliminates the release, which is our current catch-and-release program,
and requires that they must remain in custody, an illegal alien, until
removed. Better communication and sharing of information with our law
enforcement community and promotes international policies with Canada
and Mexico and requires reports back to Congress.
So I think these are commonsense solutions that America expects
Congress to put into place. But as you have mentioned our work is
continuing, that the Senate is now having a very, very active debate.
That debate will continue in the House. And I think that we all agree
that we must revamp this process but starting with the very first
component, which is securing our borders. But we also need to end the
lottery that exists, get rid of senseless rules and endless litigation,
and we must have a policy in our Nation of catch and return and not our
current catch and release. And the goal, of course, would be to stop
illegal crossings in the first place. And I think the American people
deserve that. They deserve to know that that is what is taking place.

But as we continue with these discussions, one of the discussions
that will take place, of course, is what about workforce, what about
guest workers?

[[Page H1315]]

How should that be crafted and what should that look like so we know
who are the people who are here? Why are they here? What are they doing
here? What is the purpose that they are here? But as a component of
that, I also think it is critical that we deal with the issue of health
care and that employers who want these workers in our Nation, and we
know there is a tremendous need for them, would have to address that
issue of health care right up front and not put that burden on the
American people as it has done in the past.
So I thank you for the opportunity just to come and tell America what
the House of Representatives did do and that as we continue the debate
that they will understand that the first goal is secure our borders. We
know this is a national security issue. We know the goal of our enemy
is to destroy our Nation, to attack us at any possible turn.
I am grateful to our very brave military men and women who we know
are taking out their leaders right now, shutting down their money, and
keeping them busy over in Iraq and that they have not had the ability
to attack our Nation again. And I think that we expect in Congress and
the American people expect that we not allow these people to enter
because of poor policies that we have in place; that our doors be open
for tourism, for travel, for legal immigration, and closed to those who
would do us harm.
And I thank you for arranging this meeting tonight and allowing me to
join you in it.
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Thank you, Congresswoman Drake, very much. You
have just really clarified and crystalized the components of our
immigration bill that we passed last December.
And I know that some of us have shared our frustration with the folks
at home because there was really little attention paid to what the
House did, very responsibly what the House did last December.
Recognizing the incredible challenges that we have with immigration
reform, working extremely hard to come up with a bill that addressed
border security and interior enforcement. I guess if we were to be
faulted for anything is that we did it during the Christmas holiday and
it kind of got drowned out. But it is an important bill. It is an
important bill. And I thank you for talking about the points in it that
I think are vital and imperative as we move forward.
As we talk about the issue of border security and national security,
the two are really closely linked, very closely linked, and it is a
real challenge for America to move forward with immigration reform and
border security. And one of the reasons that I believe it is such a
challenge is that we essentially have had in our Nation over the last
really 20 or 30 years a policy as it relates to illegal immigration of
benign neglect. That is what our policy has been, and I am disappointed
that that is the case. But as somebody once said, you play with the
cards that you are dealt. And, in fact, the cards that we are dealt
right now are a system that has been really neglected for a long, long
period of time. So I am so pleased with the work that the House has
done and will continue to do in trying to fashion the most responsible
border security and immigration reform policy that we can.
Again, I think it is important that you make certain that we talk
about truth. What is the truth? Where are we now that has put us in
this challenging situation and in literally this crisis? And the issue
is that we have between 12 and 20 million people here who are here
illegally. And Congresswoman Blackburn has so often mentioned that she
believes that it is not appropriate to call it illegal immigration,
that it is illegal entry. She uses the wonderful analogy of if somebody
were to enter your home illegally, you would not open your arms to
welcome them. What you would do is take care of it. You would call on
the authorities and ask them for help. And what has happened over the
last 20 or 30 years is that when the States and localities have called
on the authorities, the Federal Government, to come help, they have
been left wanting. And that really is a shame. That is the benign
neglect that I talk about. But comprehensive immigration reform has to,
it must, begin with securing our borders. If you do anything else
without securing the borders, it does not make any difference.

{time} 2215

The porosity of our borders makes it so that is imperative, and the
national security, as I mentioned, depends on border security. We need
to know who is coming into the country. We need to know where they are
from, and we need to know what they are doing here.
No immigration, no reform of the immigration system will be
successful unless Congress makes the definitive commitment, has the
willpower to make the commitment to ensure that the agencies that are
responsible for stopping illegal immigrants have the resources that
they need to get the job done. That just makes sense.
Without properly securing our borders, we remain vulnerable. I don't
think anybody would deny that we remain vulnerable to those who may
want to enter our country undetected and do us harm. We must ensure
that our Border Patrol agents have the resources and the manpower and
the technology to do their jobs.
I understand, and all of us understand, that America is a nation of
immigrants. We are all here by virtue of somebody coming here from
somewhere else at some point that allowed us the wonder and the glory
and the good fortune and the blessing of being born or allowed to be a
citizen of the United States of America.
We are also a nation of laws. We are a nation of laws, and I think it
is extremely important that we appreciate that indeed America has been
built on the hard work and the innovation of immigrants, without a
doubt, and our country thrives on new ideas, and fresh energy that so
many of our legal immigrant groups continue to bring. It is part of
what makes our country great without a doubt.
We will remain a nation of immigrants, regardless of what we do in
this legislation, because the number of legal immigrants that we
welcome to our shores every year is significant. We invited over 1
million new permanent immigrants last year, much more than any other
nation on the face of the earth. We accept over 6 million applications,
6 million applications, Mr. Speaker, for immigration and immigration
benefits each year.
But America, again, has been founded on the principle and the respect
for the rule of law. Those who enter our country illegally disrespect
those laws, and they take advantage of a very generous immigration
system and a very generous society.
We have got to find a comprehensive solution, a comprehensive
solution that acknowledges the important contributions of legal
immigrants and what they do to make our country great without rewarding
illegal behavior. It is imperative that we remove that magnet of
illegal employment and enable employers to be able to determine whether
their workers are legal or illegal.
I think it is important when we talk about the employer verification
aspect of the bill that we passed, and of any reform mechanism, that we
make certain that we communicate to our employer community that we are
not asking them to be policemen; and that the Federal Government's
responsibility is to make certain that they are able to access real
information in real time to be able to determine whether an employee
that is coming to their place of work and asking to be hired, whether
or not that individual is here legally. They need to be able to
determine that then and now so that they can go ahead with the plan to
either hire them or not based upon their qualifications, and not have
to delay things because the Federal Government doesn't have accurate
information.
I am pleased with the work that the House has done. This is a work in
progress. The Senate is acting and will act, and then we will move
forward with a conference committee, a group of the House and Members
of the House and Members of the Senate to come up with a final product
that hopefully we all can stand and be proud of and that will address a
true crisis and a true challenge that we have in this Nation and end
this policy of benign neglect that we have had for so many years.
Again, the issue we are talking about this evening on the Official
Truth Squad is national security. I am pleased to be joined again
tonight by Congresswoman Virginia Foxx. Congresswoman Foxx is from the
grand

[[Page H1316]]

State of North Carolina, a dear friend and fellow member of the
freshman class who is committed, committed, to making certain that
truthful comments are made from the well, and that those things that
are made, those comments that are made in the House that are not
truthful are corrected.
I am pleased to have Congresswoman Foxx join me this evening to
discuss the issue of national security. I welcome you, and I look
forward to your comments this evening.
Ms. FOXX. Thank you so much, Congressman Price. It is very good to be
on the Official Truth Squad with you and to bring facts out that need
to be brought out. I heard your comments about illegal immigration, and
I share those concerns with you. As we talked about homeland security,
national security begins with border security. That is very important.
I think what we have to make sure that people understand all the
time, the Federal Government was formed to provide for the defense of
this Nation. It began by the States joining together to get our freedom
from England, but we stay together for the defense of this Nation.
Local government, State governments, cannot provide for the defense of
this Nation.
We are the most free country in the world. We are, in my opinion, the
greatest country in the world. We are not perfect. None of us who serve
in Congress, none of us in the executive branch, are perfect people.
But the Republican party is focused on the issue of national
security. We, as Republicans, understand that if we don't maintain our
freedom, then nothing else matters. The way we maintain our freedom is
to make sure that we have strong borders and that we protect against
attacks like the ones that hit us on September 11, 2001. We are focused
on that, and I think that the administration has done a great job of
keeping us from being attacked again.
What are the Democrats doing in that respect? Today, they managed to
release their so-called ``national security agenda.'' We have been
waiting for this plan that they say they are going to roll out where
they say they can do things better.
One of the things their agenda calls for is improving border
security. Now it is really curious that is what they say. They think
they can tell the American people something that the American people
will believe, and that we will ignore what they have done. Let me talk
about what Republicans have done and what the Democrat reaction has
been to that.
Last year, House Republicans passed the Border Protection,
Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act, as well as the REAL
ID Act. How do these bills protect our border?
The Border Security Act increases penalties for illegal immigration
and holds violators accountable to restore the integrity of our
Nation's borders, reestablish respect for our laws, and help ensure
that terrorists cannot enter the United States.
The REAL ID Act federally standardizes the requirements for applying
and issuing State identification cards, because the 19 hijackers
responsible for the 9/11 terrorist attacks carried between them 13
valid driver's licenses and 21 State-issued ID cards.
How do the Democrats vote on these issues? They are telling you now
that they want to protect the border, and that is a part of their
national security agenda. Well, 164 of the Democrats opposed the Border
Security Act, and 152 opposed the REAL ID Act. So the Democrats now
want to improve border security?
Here is a tip for them, Mr. Speaker. They need to start voting for
legislation that does exactly that. They need to quit talking and start
doing.
Today, when I was listening to them doing 1 minutes, something
occurred to me, the motto of the State of North Carolinas is Esse Quam
Videre, To Be Rather Than to Seem. I kept thinking that the Democrats
never want to admit what they are, but rather they want people to think
that they are something else. I think that they are the antithesis of
the motto for North Carolina, To Be Rather Than to Seem, because they
just want to seem to be something that they are not at all.
Earlier tonight, I heard somebody say, the Democrats will never agree
to what their real agenda is, because it is so much opposed to the
values of average Americans that if they admit to their real agenda,
admit to their real values, they can't ever get elected again.
I think that it is very important that we continue to talk about
border security and other things as it relates to national security.
The Democrats also voted against the creation of the Department of
Homeland Security. The Department of Homeland Security helps prevent
domestic terrorist attacks and assists the recovery and response
efforts in the event of a terrorist attack. It passed the House 261-
161. One hundred twenty Democrats opposed.
Last night we mentioned the PATRIOT Act conference report that
strengthens our national security by giving law enforcement the tools
they need to wage the war on terror and includes new oversight measures
so that security and liberty remain balanced. It passed the House 251-
174 with 157 Democrats opposing. The Democratic leader in the Senate
bragged that they had killed the PATRIOT Act, and then when the PATRIOT
Act came back, they short of sheepishly voted for it, wanting everybody
to think that it was all okay and to forget about their bragging that
they had killed the PATRIOT Act.
What about intelligence votes that weakened our national security
before September 11? We might not have had September 11 if we had had
an even stronger national security and if the Democrats had gotten on
board with making sure that we could do all that we needed to do. In
1998, Representative Pelosi was one of only 31 Representatives who
voted against authorizing appropriations for intelligence and
intelligence-related activities of the U.S. Government for the CIA and
related agencies. Several bills are outlined there.
In 1996, she and 153 House Democrats voted to reduce the total amount
authorized by the fiscal year 1997 intelligence authorization by 4.9
percent. Even when Pelosi and the Democrats were in charge of the House
of Representatives, they voted to cut intelligence authorization by
$500 million.
We are going to present every chance we get the facts about what the
Democrats have done. We are going to present the facts through the
Official Truth Squad. We are not going to let them get by with seeming
rather than being. And I think that that is very, very important.
I want to quote our Majority Leader Boehner today in a statement that
he made:
``While Democrats have openly advocated cutting and running from our
efforts to support democracy in Iraq, Republicans continue to build
upon our strong record on national security by funding our troops
fighting terror around the world and supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom
and Operation Enduring Freedom.
``While Democrats seem more interested in protecting the rights of
terrorists than the American people, Republicans passed the PATRIOT Act
to give law enforcement the tools necessary to combat terrorism,
protect our citizens and secure our communities.
``While Democrats focus more on protecting the rights of illegal
immigrants than enforcing our immigration laws, Republicans have voted
to secure our borders, give law enforcement new tools to enforce our
immigration laws and help prevent terrorist and criminal aliens from
moving freely throughout our society. When it comes to national
security, their answer is the same as it is for everything else,
``no.'' A media stunt will not eclipse their record of obfuscation and
neglect on national and border security.''
Those are the comments from Majority Leader Boehner today. I endorse
what he has said. I think he has hit the nail right on the head.
Someone else said that the Democrats say, ``Do as we say, not as we do,
on national security.'' That is another, I think, thing that we need to
point out to the American people every chance that we get.
Again, we have to protect the freedom of this country. That is what
allows us to do all the other great things that we do. Without national
security, without freedom, we can't do any of the other good things. We
are trying to bring freedom to other countries just as we have it here.
It may take a little bit longer than it did in this country because of
the very different cultural

[[Page H1317]]

basis that we came from, but it is going to happen. We are going to
help export freedom all over this world and that is going to help keep
Americans free because that is what we have to do.

{time} 2230

Representative Price, again, I want to thank you for the work that
you are doing on helping us get out the facts and making sure that the
Truth Squad presents the truth every night, and I would like to now
turn my time back over to you.
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Thank you so much, Representative Foxx. You are
always so cogent and accurate in what you say. And you do the Official
Truth Squad proud by bringing forward the information that is so
important for citizens all across this country in order for them to be
able to make appropriate decisions and realize what kind of work is
being done here in Washington, positive work, positive work on behalf
of the American people.
That is what the Official Truth Squad is all about. It is all about
making certain that the accurate information, honest information for
the entire Nation is being presented at some point on the floor of the
House because oftentimes what we hear is not that kind of information.
So I cannot thank you enough for coming and joining me this evening
really, again, in a discussion about national security that is so
extremely important; and it is important because nothing is more basic
to our ability as a Nation and each of our ability as individuals to
realize our own dream.
If we are not secure, if we cannot maintain our liberty and our
freedom, then nothing else matters. Then what kind of job you have,
where you work, what you want to do with your family, where you want to
live, all those kind of wonderful things that all of us as Americans
think about, dream about and work so hard for won't make any difference
if we do not have the kind of security that we need.
I appreciate also you taking it in a little bit of a different
direction because I think it is important that we talk about what the
other side has proposed because it is important that they have stated
they have given the talk, it is important to look at how they are
walking and how they have walked. I also think it is important to shed
light on the truth of where we stand as a Nation in this world and how
grave and significant the enemy is because some people will tell you,
well, there really is not an enemy out there. That if we just gather
round and kind of huddle down that there will not be any problem with
anybody else on the face of the Earth, that the people will just leave
us alone.
Well, in fact, I think that if we truly and honestly look at the
situation and if we reflect over the last 25 or so years we will
appreciate that we have been in this war on terror for a much longer
period of time than any of us might have admitted just a few short
years ago. And in order to bring light to that, in order to provide
some truth to that, I thought I would repeat something that I mentioned
last evening. It is a very sobering list. It is a list of events that I
think are extremely important to reflect upon because I think they put
in perspective how we as a Nation are being challenged and that allows
us to respond in a much more appropriate way.
So as a matter of truth I proposed, Mr. Speaker, to just kind of
outline and list a number of events that have occurred over the last 25
years beginning as many of us will remember in November of 1979 when
the embassy, our embassy in Tehran was seized and there began that 444-
day long hostage crisis that I think was kind of the beginning of this
litany of events that occurred.
In April 1983 there was the bombing of our embassy in Beirut, 63
Americans killed. In October of 1983, the bombing of our U.S. Marine
Corps Headquarters in Beirut, 241 killed. In December 1983, a truck
loaded with explosives driven into our embassy in Kuwait. In September
1984 another violation of our embassy in Beirut. In August 1985 the
bombing of the United States Air Force Base in Rhein-Main, 22 killed.
In October 1985, the Achille Lauro was highjacked and an American
invalid in a wheelchair was killed. April 1986, Madrid bombing of a
restaurant frequented by U.S. soldiers. April 1988, TWA flight 840 was
bombed killing four. Again, in 1988 Pan Am flight 103 bombed over
Lockerbie, Scotland, killing 259.
January 1993, two CIA agents shot and killed as they entered CIA
headquarters in Langley, Virginia. February 1993, the first World Trade
Center bombing killing six and injuring over a thousand. November 1995,
car bomb explodes at a U.S. military complex in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
killing seven servicemen and women. June 1996, a truck bomb in Dhahran
destroys the Khobar Towers, a United States Air Force barracks, killing
19 and injuring over 500. And then two coordinated attacks on U.S.
embassies in Kenya and Tanzania killing 224. October 2000 the USS Cole
was attacked in Yemen. And then on September 11, 2001 the second World
Trade Center attack killing 3,000 of our fellow citizens, innocent all.
I think it is important to talk about that because that is the truth.
That is the truth of where we sit as a Nation right now. And some will
say, well, that was the end of it September 11, 2001. Well, the truth
is that that was not the end and is not the end. And I cannot think of
anything better to crystallize that and to explain that and to bring it
to light than to quote an avowed enemy of the United States, Abu Musab
al-Zarqawi, who said in January 2005, ``We have declared a fierce war
on this evil principal of democracy and those who follow this wrong
ideology.''

That is not anything we made up, Mr. Speaker. That is our enemy. That
is an individual who designs day in and day out to do us harm, to hurt
America and to hurt Americans. And so when we talk about things as
grave and as important as that, I think it is incredibly important that
we talk about what the plan is for each party, who is in charge, who is
making the policy and what is the plan.
So as our friends on the other side on the aisle today unfolded their
national security policy that they would propose, and it is an
appropriate policy, the problem is that it reminds me of that wonderful
country and western song that is out there right now, what we need is
``A little less talk and a lot more action.'' And the talk that they
have brought to the table is mostly appropriate; but the action that we
have seen from our friends on the other side of the aisle just does not
ring true. It does not ring true.
They call for eliminating terrorist breeding grounds, but in fact
what they ignore is that Iraq is the central front in the war or terror
and a breeding ground for terrorists. What do they say? Their security
agenda supports our troops in Afghanistan. What do they do? When given
the opportunity a majority of House Democrats voted against funding the
troops in combat in Iraq and in Afghanistan. Their security agenda says
they will stop the spread of terrorists. But what do they do? They
oppose the terrorists surveillance program.
Another thing that they talk about is proposing an anti-terrorism
plan that increases human intelligence capability, eliminates terrorist
breeding grounds, secures loose nuclear materials and stops nuclear
weapons development in Iran and North Korea. What do they do when given
the opportunity? They voted repeatedly to slash funding for
intelligence activities and they vote no on expressing support for
those who work in the intelligence community.
Mr. Speaker, this is the truth. This is the truth. This is what
happened. When given the opportunity to say we as a sense of Congress
support the men and women who are risking their lives and working in
the intelligence community to make sure that you and I are safe what do
they do? They vote no. If anybody is interested in looking it up it is
Roll Call number 293. The vote was on June 23, 2004.
That is what the Official Truth Squad is about to call people to
task, to say this is what the truth is. You can say anything you like
on the floor of the House of Representatives. We have certainly
recognized that. But it is important that you are held to account that
you are held responsible for your actions. You what do they say? They
say it calls for a stronger homeland security by implementing all
recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. What do they do? They vote
against the REAL ID Act which makes it difficult for terrorists to
travel freely

[[Page H1318]]

throughout the United States, and they vote no on additional funds to
respond to the attacks of September 11 and to bolster the homeland
security efforts. Roll Call vote number 31 in February of last year.
Roll Call vote number 206 in May of 2002.
Mr. Speaker, that is the truth. That is the truth. So you can talk
the talk but you have got to be able to walk the walk. You can say one
thing but you have got to be able to do it. And I think it is important
for the House of Representatives to understand and appreciate and for
the American people to understand and appreciate that there is a track
record. There is a track record of a group of individuals who are in
the leadership and forming the policy in the United States House of
Representatives now that supports our intelligence community. It is
vital work, incredibly important work.
Then there is a group of individuals who say that they support the
intelligence community but when given the opportunity to provide the
resources for them to work and when given the opportunity just to say
we thank you and support what you are doing as a matter of principle
they could not even do that.
What do they say? Again, they say they will support the
recommendations and work for implementing the recommendations of the 9/
11 Commission, a bipartisan commission. What do they do when they get
the opportunity? They vote no on establishing the Department of
Homeland Security. Roll Call number 367, July, 2002. They vote no on
$21 billion in funding for strengthening the border protections. Roll
Call number 373, July 2004.
Mr. Speaker, it is indeed an incredible privilege and an honor to
serve in the United States House of Representatives. I am humbled every
time I walk in this building. I get goose bumps looking up at the dome.
The men and women who have preceded us in this chamber and in this
body have been many incredible men and women who have donated the
better part of their lives toward making certain that we as a society
and we as a Nation will survive. They did so by talking about real
things, by talking about honest things, by talking about truthful
things, by working together with other individuals all across this
body. And I challenge Members on both sides on the aisle, Republicans
and Democrats, to work together, to come together as a body and work
for our national security and work positively.

____________________