[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 122 (Tuesday, September 26, 2006)]
[House]
[Pages H7440-H7445]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE HOUSE THAT THE BORDER PATROL IS PERFORMING 
                         AN INVALUABLE SERVICE

  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and 
agree to the resolution (H. Res. 1030) expressing the sense of the 
House of Representatives that the United States Border Patrol is 
performing an invaluable service to the United States, and that the 
House of Representatives fully supports the more than 12,000 Border 
Patrol agents.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                              H. Res. 1030

       Whereas Border Patrol agents are a highly trained and 
     qualified group of men and women;
       Whereas Border Patrol agents protect the United States from 
     an influx of illegal immigration, illicit drugs, counterfeit 
     goods, and terrorists;
       Whereas Border Patrol agents protect our borders in some of 
     the most remote and dangerous areas of the country; and
       Whereas Border Patrol agents continue to perform their 
     duties under tough circumstances: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of 
     Representatives that the men and women of the United States 
     Border Patrol should be supported for their dedication to the 
     United States and to their mission to secure our borders.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Alabama (Mr. Rogers) and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Loretta 
Sanchez) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Alabama.


                             General Leave

  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all 
Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend 
their remarks on this legislation and insert extraneous material on the 
bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Alabama?

[[Page H7441]]

  There was no objection.
  Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, as a strong supporter of this 
resolution, I further ask unanimous consent that the sponsor of this 
legislation, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones), be allowed 
to control the time in support of H. Res. 1030.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Alabama?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from 
Alabama and because the resolution is short, I would like to read the 
remainder of the resolution and then make my comments and yield time to 
those who would like to speak.
  To continue as the Reading Clerk read:
  ``Whereas Border Patrol agents are a highly trained and qualified 
group of men and women;
  ``Whereas Border Patrol agents protect the United States from an 
influx of illegal immigration, illicit drugs, counterfeit goods, and 
terrorists;
  ``Whereas Border Patrol agents protect our borders in some of the 
most remote and dangerous areas of the country; and
  ``Whereas Border Patrol agents continue to perform their duties under 
tough circumstances: Now, therefore, be it
  ``Resolved, that it is the sense of the House of Representatives that 
the men and women of the United States Border Patrol should be 
supported for their dedication to the United States and to their 
mission to secure our borders.''
  Mr. Speaker, the reason I wanted to come forward with this 
resolution, and I know that certainly Ms. Sheila Jackson-Lee from Texas 
and others in the other party as well as my own party, we have been 
very concerned about two Border Patrol agents, Mr. Ramos and also Mr. 
Compean, two Border Patrol agents that joined their colleagues, over 
12,000 Border Patrol agents, who I think, in my humble opinion, have a 
very, very difficult job. I would compare their job, quite frankly, to 
our men and women in uniform overseas in Afghanistan and Iraq, because 
they are trying to protect the borders of those citizens of Iraq and 
Afghanistan and we are trying to protect the borders of the American 
citizen.
  Mr. Compean and Mr. Ramos I have had the opportunity to talk with by 
telephone, and I talked to their attorneys. These men were doing their 
job to protect the American citizen in Texas. And a drug smuggler from 
Mexico was trying to flee the United States, and in his van he had over 
700 pounds of marijuana. These men stopped him. There was a 
confrontation that took place. The drug smuggler started across the 
border. There were shots fired, and he was hit in the buttocks as he 
was trying to cross the border.
  Since that time, Mr. Speaker, these two men have been found guilty in 
a court of law. They have the possibility of spending 20 years in a 
Federal pen.
  I hate to say this, but the U.S. Attorney gave immunity to the drug 
smuggler, who still had indictments over his head here in this country. 
He was given immunity; and these two men, who have families, are now 
financially broke from trying to defend their honor and the fact that 
they did their job for the Border Patrol.
  I felt that it was important tonight, and I know my colleagues do, 
which some will be speaking later, that so many times there are law 
enforcement all over this Nation as well as our men and women in 
uniform that do a very, very invaluable job for this country. They ask 
nothing but to be respected for the tough job that they do. Whether it 
is the military or the Border Patrol or law enforcement, the pay never 
meets the requirements that we ask of those individuals; and tonight I 
felt that it was important to put this resolution in.
  This resolution will not have to go to the Senate, by the way. This 
will be a resolution of the Members of the House of Representatives 
that are not speaking to the charges and the penalty of Compean and 
Ramos, but we will be saying to the Border Patrol of this country you 
are appreciated by the House of Representatives. We know you have a 
very difficult and tough job.
  Because, Mr. Speaker, we are not only talking about people who come 
to this country illegally, between 8,000 and 10,000 every week that 
come across the border illegally. We are talking about the possibility 
of terrorists. I have said many times on the floor of this House that I 
am more concerned about terrorism coming from Central and South America 
than I am coming from Iraq and Afghanistan, quite frankly. And these 
are the men and women who are in the remote areas of America trying to 
defend the borders to protect the American citizen.
  So I am pleased tonight to say that we will have a chance tonight, or 
tomorrow, I guess, to vote on this resolution to say to those in the 
United States Border Patrol, we appreciate you. You are doing a very 
valuable job, a very important job for this country.
  I live in North Carolina. I do not have Border Patrol in my State, 
but I do appreciate those that are on the border in the Southwest and 
other parts of the United States.
  So, with that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such 
time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of House Resolution 1030, legislation 
honoring the United States Border Patrol. Without a doubt, the United 
States Border Patrol provides a critical service to this Nation. We 
rely on them to be highly trained, to be very qualified, to carry out 
the challenging and important job of securing our Nation's borders. And 
not just at the Southern border, like what we have in California.
  But I was recently at a hearing that we had up in Seattle to talk 
about the issues going on at our northern border; and, of course, our 
Border Patrol was there. And the issues that they have, the things that 
they confront are vast, and it is such a difficult, difficult job to 
do.
  So we really do want to honor and let them know, as the House of 
Representatives, that we understand that their jobs are done in 
difficult conditions, in the desert, forest, and with professionalism 
and with unfailing dedication.
  So I support the work that the United States Border Patrol is doing. 
And for that reason I think that we should not only honor them with 
words but also provide our Border Patrol agents with the resources that 
they need to do their job.
  As I said, when I was up in Seattle, one of the things we kept 
hearing over and over from the Border Patrol is that they need more 
resources. They need more people at the borders. They need more 
technology at the borders.
  In the 9/11 Act, Congress promised to increase the numbers of Border 
Patrol agents, of immigration agents and of the detention beds that we 
need when we get these people who are coming without the right 
documents and that we would also provide state-of-the-art technology to 
help the Border Patrol actually secure the borders. But, unfortunately, 
time after time after time in this House, that has been voted down. We 
have not lived up to the promise, and the Border Patrol remains 
understaffed and without access to necessary space and equipment that 
they need.
  So I expect that this House Resolution 1030 will receive broad 
bipartisan support. I can't imagine too many people who would vote 
against it, and I am looking forward to working with my colleagues who 
cast this vote to actually fulfill the promise of this vote, and that 
would be to give the much-needed resources to the United States Border 
Patrol.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 3 
minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher).
  Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of House Resolution 
1030.
  Let me just note that platitudes are not enough. When it really 
counts, the Border Patrol does need our support, and that includes 
building a fence, which some people who perhaps would be happy to sing 
the praises of the Border Patrol are not willing to help them with 
something that they consider to be essential to securing their job.
  Tonight, we are commending the service of 12,000 men and women of the 
U.S. Border Patrol. They are, in fact, performing an invaluable service 
on our border, putting their lives on the line daily to protect us, all 
of us.

[[Page H7442]]

                              {time}  1930

  They are protecting us from the effects of illegal immigration which 
are being felt in my State dramatically. They are protecting us from 
drug smugglers, human traffickers, and, yes, terrorists.
  Yet, as we declare our support today for these brave people who have 
been protecting us, we should note that this administration, that this 
administration's U.S. Attorney's Office has targeted two U.S. Border 
Patrol agents, Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean.
  The U.S. Attorney's Office has destroyed their careers and destroyed 
their lives and thrown their families into turmoil. This 
administration, which has a questionable record on border security, has 
decided to throw the book at these two agents seeking the harshest 
possible punishment. What for? For procedural violations that should 
have only resulted in a reprimand and this now has been turned into 
felonies by the U.S. Attorney's Office.
  To say that Ramos and Compean have been treated unjustly and unfairly 
is an understatement. Adding insult to injury, the U.S. Attorney's 
Office has granted immunity to the Mexican drug dealer, the smuggler 
who these two officers intercepted. This criminal alien was caught with 
743 pounds of marijuana, and the U.S. Attorney's Office has treated 
this criminal as if he were a victim.
  At the same time, the book was thrown at our border patrol agents. I 
will submit for the Record, Mr. Speaker, my letter to the Attorney 
General regarding this outrageous case. The brutal treatment of the two 
border guards has demoralized our Border Patrol agents. I hope as we 
sing our praises today, that we understand that we are, yes, grateful 
to all of these people who protect us at the border, including the two 
Border Patrol agents that are now under attack.
  In the meantime, let the case of Border Patrol agents Ramos and 
Compean be revisited and the outrageous criminal charges against them 
dropped.

                                    Congress of the United States,


                                     House of Representatives,

                                               September 21, 2006.
     Hon. Alberto R. Gonzales,
     Attorney General of the United States,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Attorney General: I am writing today to ask you to 
     personally intervene in the prosecution of U.S. Border Patrol 
     Agents Compean and Ramos. This proceeding has garnered 
     national attention calling into question the Administration's 
     commitment to secure our borders and demoralizing the 
     frontline men and women of the U.S. Border Patrol.
       I have examined the statement by U.S. Attorney Johnny 
     Sutton regarding the conviction of Border Patrol agents 
     Compean and Ramos. It is disturbing to see that the limited 
     resources available for investigation and prosecution were 
     directed not at drug smugglers, but rather aimed at two 
     veteran border patrol agents. These agents, who have risked 
     their lives guarding our borders, did not follow the 
     prescribed procedure concerning the discharge of their 
     weapons. However, their lapse of compliance occurred during a 
     tumultuous confrontation with an illegal immigrant, a 
     criminal who was in the process of smuggling 743 pounds of 
     illegal drugs into the United States. Subsequently, the 
     agents did not fully report what had happened, which also 
     violated standard operating procedures. Such violations 
     certainly deserve a reprimand. Instead of a measured 
     response, the U.S. Attorney has demanded the harshest 
     possible punishment on two otherwise outstanding Border 
     Patrol agents. There seems to be an uncompromising commitment 
     to bring down these two border guards, while an illegal drug 
     smuggler is being treated with great respect and elevated to 
     the status of victim. If there ever was a classic example of 
     distorted priorities, this it.
       As to the specifics of the case: The two border agents 
     intercepted a suspicious vehicle. The driver fled on foot, 
     running toward the border. Officer Compean, armed with a 
     shotgun, cut off the drug smuggler. A witness heard someone 
     yell ``hit him, hit him'' and then Compean shouted for the 
     fleeing criminal to stop. Officer Compean could have shot him 
     at close range. Instead, he refrained from deadly force by 
     using the butt of his shotgun. A struggle ensued with Officer 
     Compean ending up on the ground with dirt in his eyes, 
     rendering the Officer vulnerable and at risk. Officer Ramos, 
     seeing his partner laying bloodied on the ground, only then 
     shot at the assailant as he ran toward the border. The 
     fleeing criminal was wounded in the buttocks as he raced away 
     from the altercation. After the incident the officers did not 
     report the discharging of their weapons and failure to do so 
     was a violation of standard operation procedures. 
     Furthermore, they attempted to conceal this mistake, which 
     dug them in even deeper.
       Bad decisions or mistakes are never easy to acknowledge to 
     superiors. The desire to cover up bad decisions is a human 
     temptation and always makes an error even worse. 
     Nevertheless, the Herculean prosecutorial effort and huge 
     allocation of time and resources mobilized against Officers 
     Compean and Ramos was not justified. Nor was the 
     prosecution's demand for a sentence that could put these two 
     officers in prison for 20 years. This action will destroy not 
     only their careers, but the lives of two veteran patrol 
     agents and their families. The statement made by U.S. 
     Attorney Sutton is not persuasive enough to warrant the 
     severity of the penalty being sought against Officers Compean 
     and Ramos.
       Did the two officers make a mistake? Yes. Did they violate 
     procedures, not report those errors, and then obscure the 
     facts? Yes. Does this case justify a severe reprimand, or 
     perhaps a month-long suspension? Yes. Does it justify the 
     egregious legal retaliation demanded by the U.S. Attorney? 
     NO!
       Common sense should guide authorities in such matters. 
     Throw the book at criminals who threaten our families and 
     society, not at public servants protecting us because they've 
     made an error and not admitted it. Of course, had the fleeing 
     drug dealer been an honest U.S. citizen peaceably 
     surrendering to authorities, shooting him would then justify 
     the severe punishment sought by the U.S. Attorney's Office. 
     But that's not what happened!
       The criminal was clearly not a benign individual who Border 
     Patrol agents erroneously targeted. An honest citizen doesn't 
     abandon his car, run for the border, and flee from a law 
     enforcement officer. This was not an attack on an innocent 
     victim. He was an illegal alien, a criminal involved in 
     smuggling 743 pounds of illicit narcotics into our country 
     that could have ended up in the hands of our children.
       The border patrol agents are heroes, good guys who protect 
     us. In this one case they did not follow the prescribed 
     procedures when they discharged their weapons and then tried 
     to conceal their error. So, let these two public servants who 
     risk their lives to protect us, be properly disciplined, not 
     destroyed.
       The American people see this case as an illustration of the 
     Administration's inexplicable support of illegal immigration. 
     Please demonstrate this is not true by personally intervening 
     in this case. The sentencing of Agents Compean and Ramos 
     should be postponed so there can be a more thorough 
     investigation of the facts and a more rational, balanced and 
     just response from the U.S. Attorney's Office.
           Sincerely,
                                                 Dana Rohrabacher,
                                               Member of Congress.

  Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as 
she may consume to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished 
member of our committee, the gentlewoman from California, and we 
acknowledge her ongoing leadership on these issues, certainly Mr. 
Souder for his leadership, and my good friend, Mr. Jones from North 
Carolina.
  We have had a common discussion on those very important issues. Let 
me applaud you for bringing this resolution to the floor of the House 
which gives us an opportunity to affirm our commitment and appreciation 
for the Border Patrol agents that serve America's front lines.
  Let me share with you the good work, impressive work that our Border 
Patrol agents have been involved in. First of all, they have patrolled 
our borders since 1924. They are, in fact, the Nation's front liners.
  For example, in fiscal year 2005, Border Patrol agents made almost 
1.2 million arrests of people for illegally entering the country. They 
seized more than 12,300 pounds of cocaine, more than 1.2 million pounds 
of marijuana. The total street value of drugs interdicted in fiscal 
year 2005 was more than $1.4 billion.
  We are long overdue in affirming and applauding the Border Patrol 
agents of America, both on the northern and southern border. The Border 
Patrol also is charged with the responsibility of preventing terrorists 
and terrorists' weapons, including weapons of mass destruction, from 
entering the United States.
  They are there day in and day out. They are there Sunday through 
Sunday, 7 days a week, year in and year out, holidays and nonholidays.
  The Border Patrol agents are there when we are asleep, and they are 
there when we are awake. But of course in terms of responding to the 
concerns that they have, I would be remiss if I did not mention that we 
have legislation, H.R. 4044, to provide more equipment, 15,000 Border 
Patrol agents over the next 5 years, increasing the number of agents 
from 11,000 to 26,000.
  With more than 8,000 miles of land and coastal borders to patrol 
continuously, it is evident that an increase is

[[Page H7443]]

needed, but more importantly resources are needed and professionalism 
is needed.
  Mr. Speaker, let me speak for a moment on professionalism. This 
tragedy that has occurred in Texas, my own State, cries out for relief. 
We are looking to address this question by getting the facts and 
moving, hopefully expeditiously, for hearings in this Congress.
  Mr. Jones, I hope that you will encourage, as I am, the committees of 
jurisdiction to go ahead and hold hearings. Because what we are are 
fact finders. We do not misspeak, we hope. We do not pass myths and 
untruths, we hope. We tell the American people the truth, we hope.
  I say that, because, of course, I have debated many bills on this 
floor where there is a great disagreement on the facts that are 
involved. And many of us have had our differences on the Iraq war and 
still believe in the misdirection of that issue.
  But in this instance, I think we can find common ground that the men 
and women that are on the front lines, whether they are DEA, drug 
enforcement agents, FBI, whether they be ATF, whether they are U.S. 
marshals, deserve the opportunity to have their story fairly told.
  And what I can glean from the facts of this case in Texas is there 
are questions about whether their facts have been told correctly and 
whether or not they have been told appropriately. So to the Border 
Patrol agents as we stand here and congratulate you, I know that you 
ask us whether there is a bite in our bark, whether or not as we stand 
here and affirm you, we promise that we will look into the issues of 
professionalism and your civil service status and your right to 
arbitration and your right to address your issues of workplace 
questions in an organized manner.
  You are asking us whether we are going to provide you with the 
necessary new Border Patrol agents, whether or not we are going to give 
you the equipment that includes power boats and includes night goggles 
and computers and a number of other equipment, helicopters, that will 
give you what you need to have.
  And then you ask the question, when you are in the line of duty, will 
we stand by you with the facts? Will we have the wherewithal to ensure 
that all of the facts are on the table, so that the miscarriage of 
justice, prosecution, ultimate incarceration, destruction of your 
family, does not occur on the clock of Members of the United States 
Congress?
  So I rise to support this initiative of my friend, Mr. Jones from 
North Carolina, H. Res. 1030, and I enthusiastically affirm the 
invaluable service that the United States Border Patrol agents are 
performing for America as they stand in the way, in the bridge, if you 
will, on the northern and southern border. In the darkness of night, in 
the coldness of night, in the warmness of night, in the rainiest of 
nights, and in the greatest disasters that may face us, Border Patrol 
agents are there to protect us.
  I ask my colleagues to support this amendment, and I ask that we be 
able to address the questions that are being raised in Texas in 
fairness and opportunity for fairness.
  I rise in support of House Resolution 1030, which would express the 
sense of the House of Representatives that the Border Patrol is 
performing an invaluable service to the United States, and that the 
House of Representatives fully supports the more than 12,000 Border 
Patrol agents.
  Border Patrol agents have patrolled our borders since 1924, and they 
have an impressive record of accomplishments. For instance, in FY 2005, 
Border Patrol Agents made almost 1.2 million arrests of people for 
illegally entering the country, and they seized more than 12,300 pounds 
of cocaine and more than 1.2 million pounds of marijuana. The total 
street value of drugs interdicted in FY 2005 was more than $1.4 
billion. The Border Patrol also is charged with the responsibility of 
preventing terrorists and terrorists weapons, including weapons of mass 
destruction, from entering the United States.
  Although we should express our support for the Border Patrol, we also 
should provide the Border Patrol agents with the equipment and 
resources they need to secure the border. We need a Border Patrol with 
enough agents to patrol the entire border effectively, and they have to 
have the weapons and other equipment that is necessary for 
confrontations with heavily armed drug smugglers and the other 
dangerous criminals who cross the border illegally.
  I have introduced a bill that would provide the Border Patrol with 
the equipment and resources they need, the Rapid Response Border 
Protection Act of 2005, H.R. 4044.
  H.R. 4044 would add 15,000 Border Patrol agents over the next five 
years, increasing the number of agents from 11,000 to 26,000. With more 
than 8,000 miles of land and coastal borders to patrol continuously, it 
is evident that this increase is desperately needed, particularly if 
they are to be able to respond in sufficient numbers when heavily armed 
smugglers are encountered. H.R. 4044 also has provisions for body 
armor, special weapons, and night vision equipment.
  H.R. 4044 is strongly endorsed by the National Border Patrol Council 
and the National Homeland Security Council, organizations that 
represent the front-line employees who enforce our immigration and 
customs laws.
  Nevertheless, it also is important to express our support for the 
hard work and dedication of the men and women in the Border Patrol, and 
of course I further salute all of the men and women who provide service 
in the securing of our Homeland at the northern and southern borders 
and at our ports, ports of entry and coastlines. I ask my colleagues to 
vote for H. Res. 1030.
  Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance 
of my time.
  Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may 
consume to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder).
  Mr. SOUDER. Mr Speaker, I thank the gentleman from North Carolina for 
yielding me time and thank him for this resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, we also want to, in addition to the Border Patrol, 
praise all of the people in the Department of Homeland Security, in the 
Coast Guard, in ICE, and Customs and Border Protection at the points of 
entry.
  For those who may not be completely familiar, the Border Patrol are 
the people who are in between the points of entry. Obviously, the men 
and women at the point of entry, the ICE agents internally, as they 
pursue the investigations which often cross into the zones of the 
Border Patrol, and at ports of entry, and the Coast Guard which are at 
water points of entry, are all working together in a seamless 
organization.
  Unfortunately, the Border Patrol often gets the least attention of 
those different agencies. And this resolution correctly gives them some 
of the credit that they are due. Often they are not only in these very 
hot zones in the south, at times cold in the winter, and in the north, 
very cold; often we forget we have a northern Border Patrol as well. 
That is actually, not the numbers, but a bigger percent increase than 
the south. They are often also alone.
  One of the reasons we need a fence and virtual fencing and other 
technological things to help our Border Patrol agents is often there is 
one there, or there may be four scattered over a mile and a half, and 
all of a sudden there is a group of seven SUVs coming at them, as we 
have had in Arizona, armed to the teeth. Even when we get a tip and put 
a Blackhawk in, you are looking at heavily armored vehicles coming at a 
few agents with no warning.
  It may be a case of where you may have groups of 300 to 400 illegal 
immigrants coming at one or two or three or four agents. They have no 
idea whether they are armed or not armed. There are zones along the 
border where there is not as much pressure on illegal immigrants, but 
which are huge drug-trafficking areas, not only on the south border, 
but on the north border, along Blaine, Washington.
  Going east from there is the trafficking of so-called BC Bud, this 
high-grade marijuana that is basically the same as cocaine. Arms 
trafficking going back into Canada. The largest export right now in 
British, Columbia is not timber; it is not any other product other than 
marijuana.
  And the reason cocaine and heroin and guns are going into BC where we 
now see violence breaking out, first RCMP officers killed in British, 
Columbia, are going through those zones where the Border Patrol in the 
north border are trying to protect it. Often one or two agents with 
armed, heavily armed people coming at us.
  And Neely's Crossing, just east of El Paso, where they have a 
bulldozer on the Mexican side. The drug lords have a bulldozer on their 
side. It is one of the only areas of the Rio Grande which

[[Page H7444]]

is basically spotty puddles of water in that zone, has a gravel base. 
And they push additional gravel in there. Anytime we put a barrier up, 
they put it there.
  And as they brought one vehicle across at one point, some of our 
Border Patrol were tipped off. As this vehicle tried to get back across 
on the Mexican side, it got stuck. We know there were at least, the 
guess is, 10 tons of marijuana. We got about a 1\1/2\ tons out.
  They jumped out of their vehicles with AK-47s, armed heavily at our 
Border Patrol who then back up, which brings us to this fundamental 
question. Not only do these men and women deserve our credit for 
putting themselves at risk, not only do they have difficult jobs, and 
often are they outnumbered, but then this case that is occurring in 
Texas, without understanding all of the legal formalities, will have a 
chilling effect on the Border Patrol's willingness to defend us.
  Because, if they think they are going to be prosecuted if they try to 
defend us, depending upon the particular angle at a given time of what 
someone is doing, and they are in a shootout, and the other side has 
guns, deliver poison into the United States in the terms of narcotics, 
or potentially chemical or nuclear weapons, or potentially high-risk 
terrorists who are willing to pay high dollars, and our Border Patrol 
are afraid to even risk any type of confrontation because they are 
going to be prosecuted by our government, how are we going to stay 
safe?
  We need to praise them for taking the risk. We need to praise them 
for being willing to stay out in the cold and in the heat and be 
outnumbered and not know what kind of guns are at them. We certainly do 
not need to be prosecuting them. So I hope this resolution makes it 
clear where this House stands. I am sure we will have committee 
hearings. We may have to wait until the case goes through, but the 
Border Patrol needs to know that this Congress stands behind them, that 
we are going to get to the bottom of the type of procedures that are 
involved in this and make sure that they can defend not only 
themselves, but defend us, our children, our families and our Nation.
  Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I would just like to 
say to the previous speaker that I would really like to see the 
information on 300 or 400 people running across the border at one time.
  Because I have just never heard of a case like that. Having said 
that, we do support the Border Patrol. We are glad that Mr. Jones has 
this resolution up on the floor tonight.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to 
the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder) to respond to Ms. Sanchez.
  Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Speaker, as the gentlewoman knows, in San Diego we 
used to have, I saw with my own eyes in the middle of the night, about 
1,200. But as we fenced that area, we broke up the big groups there in 
San Diego.
  And so in San Diego you no longer have the huge groups of 1,000. We 
thought we were down to groups of basically, I have seen 50 or 100 with 
my own eyes, but as the gentlewoman had probably heard, I cannot 
remember if you were there when Secretary Chertoff was speaking to our 
Homeland Security Committee this morning, but that Congressman Pearce 
from New Mexico said that there are a number of cases, particularly in 
New Mexico right now, because as we worked on the Arizona border, 
pushed them into New Mexico where he said this morning that he had seen 
300 to 400 at a time in New Mexico.

                              {time}  1945

  That is questioning the statement of a Member from New Mexico who 
just saw this in the last 7 to 14 days. I myself have seen 50 to 100, 
and I used to see 1,200 before we built a fence in San Diego.
  Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume, and I am just going to make a couple of comments, and 
then I am going to finish.
  I want to first thank Ms. Sanchez and Ms. Sheila Jackson-Lee for her 
comments and what she stated as well as Ms. Sanchez and my friend, Mr. 
Souder from Indiana, and Mr. Rohrabacher from California.
  I think that we all agree that this resolution is important, and I 
just want to say that I would agree with the comments made by Ms. 
Sanchez that we need to make sure that the border patrol has what it 
needs to secure the borders for this great Nation.
  I want to say to Ms. Jackson-Lee, as well as Mr. Rohrabacher, that we 
do need to make sure that these agents had been treated fairly in the 
process as it related to the indictment.
  I would say to Mr. Souder, I thank you as well as other Members who 
serve on the Homeland Security Committee for your leadership to make 
sure that we do protect our borders.
  The only other point I would like to make, Mr. Speaker, is that it 
has been made by these people who live in California and Texas and even 
my friend from Indiana, as well as my friends from California, that 
this is a very difficult job. These are men and women that are 
dedicated. They are not doing it for the money. They are doing it for 
the love of this country. And what they are doing is the same thing 
that our military does and that is try to make America secure.
  Mr. HIGGINS. Mr. Speaker, I have every intention of voting for the 
resolution on the floor today because it honors the men and women of 
the U.S. Border Patrol.
  But I think the greatest way to honor the men and women who risk 
their lives to protect us against terrorist attacks is by passing 
legislation that provides the funding and tools they need to do their 
job effectively. It is unfortunate, however, that my colleagues on the 
other side of the aisle show this appreciation only through rhetoric.
  The Bush Administration has had almost six years to secure the 
border, the Republican Congress eleven. Yet in the past two weeks they 
have chosen to honor our border agents by recycling legislation that 
has no funding.
  The sponsor of today's resolution voted ``yes'' only once of the last 
5 border security bills proposed to enhance the resources of the Border 
Patrol. That vote, taken on May 2, 2005, was a $284 million emergency 
spending bill to secure the nation's border. It would have allowed 550 
additional border patrol agents and 200 additional immigration 
investigators. Unfortunately, the Republicans voted ``no'' on motion.
  Similarly, last December, my Republican colleagues voted against the 
Democratic Motion to Recommit for H.R. 4437 which would have:
  Created 3,000 new U.S. Border Patrol agent positions every year 
through FY 2010 (a total of 12,000 new agents);
  Added 25,000 new detention beds every year through FY 2010 (a total 
of 100,000 new beds) to permanently end catch-and-release;
  Developed a comprehensive, technologically superior, round-the-clock, 
fully interoperable surveillance system to monitor every mile of the 
border;
  Required plans to integrate high altitude monitoring technologies, 
radiation portal monitors, K-9 detection teams, and other technologies; 
and,
  Make physical infrastructure enhancements, including additional 
checkpoints, all weather access roads, and vehicle barriers, while 
maintaining the speed of commerce through such points of entry.
  Honoring the men and women of the Border Patrol should not only 
consist of rhetoric. We need comprehensive policy accompanied by 
dollars and resources to support the Border Patrol.
  I will vote for House Resolution 1030, but I am disheartened with the 
lack of support that my colleagues across the aisle have repeatedly 
shown toward our men and women securing the border.
  A pat on the back is nice. But allocating resources would go a long 
way to securing the border.
  Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support H. Res. 1030 
to express a sense of the House of Representatives that the United 
States Border Patrol is performing an invaluable service to the United 
States, and that the House of Representatives fully supports the more 
than 12,000 Border Patrol agents. As a member of the Committee on 
Homeland Security, I know well the important role the Border Patrol 
plays in defending and protecting our homeland from foreign threats.
  I strongly support this resolution because Border Security is an 
issue of utmost importance to my district the U.S. Virgin Islands and 
have in the past, proposed legislations to require the Department of 
Homeland Security, DHS, to establish a Border Patrol Unit in the U.S. 
Virgin Islands.
  The security of the residents of the U.S. Virgin Islands as well as 
the mainland residents is greatly compromised. The U.S. V.I. contains 
over 175 miles of open unprotected borders which provides a viable 
alternative for terrorists, human smugglers and drug smugglers to

[[Page H7445]]

gain access to the U.S. mainland because we are only 1,600 kilometers 
away from the U.S mainland.
  Since 1998 Mr. Speaker, close to 1000 Chinese nationals have entered 
the U.S. Virgin Islands to transit undetectably into the mainland. 
These landings have occurred mainly during the pre-dawn hours at one of 
the several cays on the Island of St. John. The shear number of 
individuals who are able to infiltrate the island is indicia of 
vulnerability to a possible terrorist attack.
  The lack of a Border Patrol Security Unit, has placed an unreasonable 
burden on other Federal agencies such as the Immigration and Customs 
Enforcement, ICE, which has to now spend considerable amount of man-
hours apprehending, processing and detaining aliens in custody. This 
detracts from the time ICE would have to carryout its investigatory 
duties.
  Just last month, there was an article published in the Economist 
Magazine describing the V.S. V.I as ``America's most vulnerable point, 
a lovely place'' but ``woefully unprepared for a terrorist attack.'' 
The article points out that ``illegal aliens land in the Virgin Islands 
openly and regularly, yet they are rarely caught.'' Having a Border 
Patrol unit in the Virgin Islands, Mr. Speaker, will not only greatly 
enhance the security of the Virgin Islands, but the entire Nation as 
well.
  I urge my colleagues to support H. Res. 1030.
  Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I have no other speakers on 
H. Res. 1030, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers) that the House suspend the rules 
and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 1030.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof) the rules were suspended and the resolution was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________