[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 24 (Thursday, February 7, 2019)]
[House]
[Pages H1440-H1443]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     BORDER SECURITY AND COMPROMISE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 3, 2019, the Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. 
Grothman) for 30 minutes.
  Mr. GROTHMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to address the current 
committee meeting on our immigration problems and problems connected to 
the wall. I would like to spend a few moments updating the American 
people on the key issues and the status of the key issues that we ought 
to remember as that committee does its work.
  I have spent some time talking with constituents in the Sixth 
Congressional District and, one more time, want to address their 
concerns, or maybe address some misconceptions that are out there 
regarding this issue.
  The first thing I will address is the need to compromise. And it is 
true that, in this body, again and again, we must compromise. But I 
want to point out that prior to this committee, President Trump, has 
elected to--more than any other issue--deal with the immigration 
crisis, has compromised considerably.
  First of all, on the issue of whether we need a wall--and we will 
talk about that wall. At various different times, various different 
people have suggested different amounts on the wall. Initially, people 
talked about 20 to $25 billion. The most recent or accurate estimate it 
would take--not to build an entire wall, but just to build parts of a 
wall in areas in which one could cross the border; in other words, 
areas in which the terrain does not form a natural border, would cost 
about $8 billion.
  And I hope the negotiators who are Republicans will remember that $8 
billion figure. I got it from the gentleman who was the head of the 
Border Patrol under the Obama administration.
  President Trump, in an effort to reach some sort of compromise, has 
already gone down from $8 billion to $5.7 billion. I find that 
unfortunate, in that I toured the border about 3 weeks ago and, at the 
time--I know some of the wall that we so desperately need near Sasabe, 
Arizona, areas in which MS-13 has gone across the land, trampled across 
the land--and I have talked to the ranchers there, they will have to be 
told, sorry, we are building part of the wall, but not enough of a wall 
for you.
  So already, that $5.7 billion figure is a big compromise.
  I also want to point out with regard to time. People wonder why we 
are shutting down the government right now. Actually, we could shut 
down the government whenever people disagree on what should be in, what 
we call, an appropriations bill, but I think what people back home 
would call a budget. And every budget up here is a compromise. It 
contains hundreds of provisions. Every provision gone over, and maybe 
the Democrats want more of this; the Republicans want more of that.
  In his first 2 years here, President Trump got budgets that contained 
very, very little for anything like a wall. This is unfortunate. 
President Trump, in particular, in a budget passed about a year ago, 
what we call an omnibus bill, complained what a bad bill it was. It was 
a horrible bill, but he signed it because he didn't want to shut down 
the government, which happens when both sides disagree.
  So President Trump agreed to cave in to people that wanted to spend a 
lot more money on other things, in the interest of keeping the 
government open. But President Trump only gets a 4-year term.
  For the first 2 years he signed appropriations bills without adequate 
money for the wall. Finally, in the third time around he said, look, I 
would be happy to sign a third year of appropriations, but this time, I 
would like money for a wall. He has compromised for over 2 years.
  We had a government shutdown just 3 weeks ago because some headstrong 
Democrats, despite being happy to spend billions of dollars on other 
things, refused to give a little bit of money for the wall.
  President Trump also extended the DACA program for another 2 years. 
And I will point out, that as well is something the Border Patrol was 
not thrilled about, because whenever you talk about extending the DACA 
program, it is kind of a magnet for people south of the border, because 
they believe we are not going to enforce our immigration laws anymore.
  But, in an effort to compromise, President Trump agreed to extend the 
DACA extension for two more years. So there have been plenty of 
compromises already.

[[Page H1441]]

  And my suggestion to the committee is that they bring in experts on 
how much it would take to really secure the border, and not be afraid 
if what President Obama's head of the Border Patrol said was right, and 
if we need $8 billion, then we spend $8 billion.
  The next issue I am going to deal with is the cost of the wall; $5.7 
billion or $8 billion--we will talk about the $5.7 billion President 
Trump has come down to--is a lot of money. But Congress spends a lot of 
money.
  We should remember that the $5.7 billion President Trump wants is 
one-seventh the cost of foreign aid that this country spends every 
year. It is well under one-half of 1 percent of the overall Federal 
budget. It is actually about one-tenth of 1 percent.
  President Trump has increased defense spending as President because 
our defense budget was too low to adequately protect our population. 
But the amount where he is asking for the wall is about one-twelfth of 
the increase that we will spend year after year after year on defense.
  So you can see, when it comes to spending on anything but the wall, 
Congress has no time appropriating much more money; seven times the 
amount that we spend on foreign aid, and almost nobody objects.
  All of a sudden, with the wall, oh, maybe it is too expensive.
  The next thing I would like to address is, do we need a wall? What 
would happen if we don't have a wall?
  Remember, I am talking about $5.7 billion for a wall. It really 
should be $8 billion.

                              {time}  1830

  First of all, about 90 percent of the heroin in this country comes 
across our southern border. Now, some people like to point out that the 
vast amount of heroin caught is at the points of entry, which is true. 
We have Customs at the point of entry, and they catch people.
  In places where there is no wall, and I point to this area behind me 
near Sasabe, Arizona, people are not checked. We do not check vehicles. 
We do not check how much they have.
  Occasionally, we are fortunate enough to catch people otherwise, but 
if you were going to sneak drugs across our southern border, would you 
try to go across a normal point of entry with plenty of Customs agents 
or out here in the middle of nowhere? Of course, in the middle of 
nowhere.
  We are not serious about dealing with the heroin problem in this 
country or the fentanyl problem in this country unless we look to our 
southern border. We are not serious about securing our southern border 
until we get a wall.
  Right now, at least 12 million people are in this country illegally, 
but the Border Patrol tells us they really have no idea how many people 
are in this country illegally because they don't count the number of 
people who are coming across in these open areas. They have told me it 
is entirely possible there are 20 million people in this country 
illegally.
  Obviously, having so many people who are breaking the law just by 
being here is an unstable situation. When I talk to the Customs agents, 
they find evidence of EBT cards and evidence of Medicaid cards when 
people are walking across the border. Some of the people who are coming 
here illegally and, quite frankly, legally are illegally taking 
advantage of our welfare system.
  If they are sick, they are certainly going to our hospitals, going to 
our emergency rooms, and running up the cost of healthcare for people 
who are here legally and paying their own way.
  We believe, from the percentage of people who are here illegally in 
our Federal prisons, well more proportionately than the native-born 
population, that they are disproportionately committing crimes in this 
country.
  Quite frankly, when you add up the cost of all these things--they 
show up; their kids get free education--The Heritage Foundation 
estimates that it costs more than $50 billion a year for illegal 
immigrants in this country. $8 billion for a wall, one-time money, as 
opposed to $50 billion year after year after year?
  I am sometimes asked: Can America afford to build a wall? If we are 
losing $50 billion a year, we can't afford not to build a wall. Think 
how much stronger our economy will be when we are making sure that 
every immigrant who comes into this country is a good, productive 
immigrant.
  Another reason we need a wall is that, for people who come across 
this sort of territory near Sasabe--and this isn't really the best 
picture--frequently, it is in desert, and rocky desert, not sandy 
desert, rocky desert. Thousands of people have been found around the 
Arizona-Mexico border after having died trying to get across this 
territory.
  We are told that the cartels, which help people get across the 
border--in fact, are required to be dealt with to get across the 
border--mislead people when they get to the border. They point them and 
say this way to Phoenix, this way to Tucson, and it is maybe hundreds 
of miles further to get to Phoenix than they estimate. So the people 
are left to die of starvation or die, more likely, of dehydration.
  It is a humanitarian crisis to continue to allow people to think that 
sneaking across the open parts of the current wall that has been built 
is the way to get in the United States.
  In any event, we need a wall. We will continue to bleed money; we 
will continue to get people in this country illegally; and we will 
continue to get people who can only sneak into the country illegally 
rather than go across the normal points of entries unless we build that 
wall.
  The next question that some people will ask is: Does this mean that 
we are anti-immigrant, because America is a country of immigrants? Yes, 
America is a country of immigration, but it is a country of legal 
immigration.
  I will remind people that, every year in this country, 700,000 people 
are sworn in legally. Nobody is talking about cutting that number. A 
little under 4 million people come into this country on work visas 
every year, and a little under 2 million come in on student visas. 
Nobody is talking about cutting these numbers. Dozens of millions 
additional people come in on tourist visas.
  With regard to the work visas or people who literally come in here 
legally and wind up being naturalized, what we are asking is, for the 
people who are trying to sneak off the border without checking in with 
the Border Patrol or Customs agents at the designated areas, we are 
just asking them to get in line and go through what everybody who is 
trying to come here legally is doing.
  It is the height of irresponsibility to say that we are anti-
immigrant when we are letting almost 4 million people come into this 
country every year on work visas and having 700,000 new people sworn in 
in this country, naturalized in this country. That is not the sign of 
an anti-immigrant President. That is the sign of a President who 
understands very clearly how important immigration is to our country.
  By historic levels, it is very favorable to immigrants. We are going 
to have more foreign-born people in this country than at any time over 
the last 90 years. Again, that is not the sign of a President who is 
anti-immigrant.
  The next thing I will point out, some people think: But can't people 
come into the country another way? Well, it is true. I suppose no 
system is 100 percent effective. But the one thing I am going to say is 
that we do have a lot of walls, and walls do work in other places we 
put the walls.

  We have some pictures here of walls. Here are some walls in Sasabe, 
Arizona. There are spaces in the walls that aren't good, but when they 
build this sort of wall, whether they build the wall between Juarez and 
El Paso or a wall between San Diego and Tijuana, the walls have been 
very effective.
  Here you see the wall between San Diego and Tijuana, a very effective 
wall. People are not getting around that wall. It decreased illegal 
crossings at that place over 90 percent.
  Here is a wall in Israel between Israel and Egypt, because Israel was 
having a problem of people sneaking into their country illegally. So 
Israel built a wall. Well over 95 percent successful, nobody is getting 
across the wall anymore between Israel and Egypt, showing that the wall 
is successful.
  Other countries with successful walls, a wall that was largely built 
with U.S. taxpayer money--which I will point out people who are not 
going to vote for this wall had no problem voting for--is the wall 
along the Jordan-Syria border and part of the border

[[Page H1442]]

with Iraq, because it is important for Jordan not to let terrorists 
into their country. That wall has been highly successful in keeping 
Jordan safe.
  Another country that built a wall is Hungary, which shares a border 
with Serbia. They were afraid of other people coming from south of 
Hungary, in essence invading their country like people right now are 
trying to invade the United States. So they built a wall. Hungary has 
found that that sort of wall has been very successful in keeping out 
immigrants who they don't want to have in their country.
  There is a reason why President Clinton wanted a wall between Tijuana 
and San Diego, and there is a reason why Israel and Hungary and nine 
other European nations have walls. It is because walls work, and that 
is the clearest way to prevent people from crossing into the country 
illegally.
  There is another benefit to walls, too, that people don't take into 
account. It sends the message that the United States is serious about 
our immigration laws.
  We will talk for just a second about border security and the degree 
to which we have to build a wall to send the message that the United 
States is serious, because you hear from time to time in this body that 
certain people say everybody wants border security. Well, that is 
funny, because there are all sorts of politicians in this country of 
both parties--I will include President Bush in this--who do all sorts 
of things that would indicate that we do not intend to enforce our 
borders.
  Both the Governor of California and the mayor of New York have said 
that we should be providing free medical care to illegal immigrants. 
Does that sound like they want border security? It sounds more like 
they want to be a magnet for illegal immigration.
  Dozens of sanctuary cities and sanctuary counties, and in the case of 
California, a whole State, set themselves up as areas in which local 
officials will not ask whether people are here legally or illegally. 
That is like a magnet to people south of the border as they hear 
American elected officials, in essence, say: Don't worry about the 
immigration laws being enforced in our city or our county or our State.
  Those people do not want border security.
  Keith Ellison, a former Congressman, now attorney general of 
Minnesota, says that natural borders create an injustice. In other 
words, there is a larger crowd out there who doesn't even know we have 
a country. They say everybody can come in. Who cares.
  These are powerful people, and the people south of the border who 
want to come here illegally are listening to them.
  The Oakland mayor, another powerful person, when ICE tried to wrap up 
over 100 people, criminals, in the Oakland area to send them out of 
this country, she alerted the public to the fact that ICE was in the 
area trying to enforce our immigration laws on criminals. Why would a 
mayor undermine ICE, which is trying to evict criminals from this 
country? The reason is simple: They don't care about border security.
  Americans have to realize, for are a lot of elected officials out 
there, it is come one, come all. It is not let's pick our million or 2 
million or 3 million people who are coming into the country every year. 
It is let's let everyone come into the country.
  Those people are increasingly powerful, and their message is to 
ignore immigration laws, which is another reason why we need a wall.
  Putting up a wall everywhere where we need a wall, there are a few 
natural barriers in which it is not necessary, but I would say we need 
at least another 300 miles of wall. To put up that additional 300 miles 
of wall and improve the wall we already have sends the message that 
people like the mayor of Oakland or the Congressmen who want to get rid 
of ICE do not speak for the American Government. We are serious about 
enforcing our immigration laws.
  Now, the question is--and I don't want to tar all Democrats; I have a 
lot of Democrat friends. But why is the vast majority of Democrats not 
willing to compromise on this wall? Why are these Democrats who in the 
past had no problem voting for a wall when President Clinton was 
President, and they had no problem voting for additional wall when 
President Bush was President--and a lot of that appropriation when 
President Bush was President wasn't spent until President Obama was 
President and he was improving our walls. But why is a wall now immoral 
when the wall wasn't immoral under President Clinton or President Bush 
or President Obama?
  The answer is twofold. One, sadly, is political. A couple of weeks 
ago, eight Democrats voted in a way that I think they would be okay 
with a wall, but that is not enough. Part is, sadly, political. Some 
people don't like President Trump, and they don't want to see him 
succeed.
  Worse, we have an increasing radicalization within too many elements 
of the Democratic Party. I have been around long enough to remember 
when I think Democrats in this Chamber--I wasn't here for it--but like 
I said, where they would have quickly voted for appropriations for a 
wall under President Clinton. But this Keith Ellison new breed of 
Congressman type is quickly getting a vise grip on some members of the 
Democratic Party.
  For that reason, votes that they would have taken in a heartbeat in 
the 1990s, or in the first decade of this century, or even 7 or 8 years 
ago, they will not take anymore. They genuinely believe in some sort of 
world in which anybody who wants can come here, and it won't affect the 
long-term safety of our Nation.

                              {time}  1845

  That is preposterous, but we have to remember, that is more and more 
common.
  And I would look for the Democrats or anybody who comes down here to 
speak as to why it wasn't mean-spirited, it didn't send a bad message 
to build a wall under these other Presidents, but it does now.
  So to, one more time, go over the points that have been made for 
people to remember:
  President Trump has compromised and not built a wall for over 2 
years--really breaking the heart of a lot of his supporters.
  He has dropped the amount he wanted from, originally, $20 billion all 
the way, now, down under $6 billion, such a small amount that there 
will be big gaps in that wall because of his effort to compromise.
  President Trump has even tried to bring other issues into the debate 
by extending DACA, hoping that this sweetener would cause other people 
to move a little bit on their negotiating point. It didn't.
  I will digress for just one second while I talk about that DACA.
  The third thing to remember is that that wall is one-seventh the cost 
of foreign aid in this country.
  Is that too big of an amount? Is that something we can't handle? That 
is not true.
  The next thing to remember is, when other Presidents were building 
the wall, there were no objections around here. All of a sudden, in 
2019, when President Trump is President, in part due to the 
radicalization of some Members of this body and in part due to personal 
dislike of President Trump, too many people are willing to continue to 
allow people to stream across the border with drugs, violent people 
with disregard for their fellow citizens, not to give President Trump a 
win, and, in part, because their ideology has switched and they really 
don't need a wall at all.
  The next thing to remember is walls work. If anybody questions, walls 
work.
  Look at the wall between San Diego and Tijuana; look at the wall 
between Israel and Egypt; look at the wall between Serbia and Hungary. 
In all cases, these walls were working.
  And if you talk to the Border Patrol today, as I have, the Border 
Patrol and Customs agents will tell you we need a wall. The people who 
are down there, who are experts on the topic, know that that wall will 
work--not 100 percent, but it will work a lot better than what they 
have now.
  I should point out, they want a smart wall; they want a wall with 
some sensors on there; and they want a wall with a road.
  One of the problems we have right now enforcing our southern border 
is that, without a road, given the rough terrain, even if we find out 
somebody is sneaking across the border, the Border

[[Page H1443]]

Patrol could not get there on a very timely basis because their 
vehicles can't move there.
  Here, we have an example of a wall with a road that the Border Patrol 
can get up and down on.
  Here, we have an example of a wall without a road, which makes it 
very difficult to stop people on a timely basis.
  And then the other thing for people to remember, when people talk 
about their problems with the wall, there are a growing number of 
politicians out there, local or Federal, who really don't want border 
security. They would be pretty happy with coming across the border now.
  Now, as far as looking down the future on this issue, one of the 
things that scares me is, with all these people fighting against the 
wall, it is going to take more resolve, because that is only one of the 
issues that has to be tackled for us to secure our borders.
  Right now, our asylum laws are very flawed. People are trying to come 
into this country, sometimes with other people's children, knowing that 
if they say the magic words and that they are at risk, we will have to 
let them in this country until there is some sort of court proceeding 
that they almost certainly won't show up for.
  So after we are done with the wall, or maybe as part of the wall 
negotiations, we have got to do something with our asylum laws to 
prevent anybody who either has a child or is borrowing somebody else's 
child from trying to come in this country.
  Another problem we have: We have got a problem with people coming in 
this country for welfare. As I mentioned, the Customs agents see that.
  We have people coming into this country because of relatives, what in 
most cases would even be referred to as shirttail relatives, but they 
are taking advantage of that to come into this country.
  In any event, we have people who are becoming citizens on birthright 
citizenship. And people are coming in this country 8 months pregnant, 
having a child so that their family can come into the United States. 
There is another loophole that very few countries have that we have to 
close.
  So this wall which President Trump has been fighting for for over 2 
years is only the first step of many steps that we absolutely have to 
do to save our country.
  I plead with the American public, ask people from both sides of the 
aisle: Remember that Bill Clinton built part of a wall. Remember that 
people had no problem voting for a wall under George Bush, and remember 
that even Barack Obama improved part of the wall.
  And I ask the people on the other side--I hate to say ``on the other 
side,'' but people on the other side of the aisle, other than those who 
have already changed and said it is okay for a wall:
  Pretend it is the 1990s or the first decade of this century and 
somebody else was President, when a little more old-fashioned values 
ruled the show and we wanted to be a country of laws, and vote like 
almost everybody on that side of the aisle would have voted in the 
1990s or the first decade of the century. Vote for $5.7 billion--or 
better, a full $8 billion towards the wall so that we can secure our 
country, at least insofar as a border can secure our country. After 
that, we can tackle the problems with the asylum laws and other flaws 
in our immigration laws, tackle birthright citizenship so that we are 
determining who can come into our country in the future, because 
immigrants have been so valuable, historically, but we should aim for 
every immigrant being a good immigrant.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________