[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 69 (Wednesday, April 27, 2022)]
[House]
[Pages H4568-H4570]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          THE SOUTHERN BORDER

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 4, 2021, the Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. 
Grothman) for 30 minutes.
  Mr. GROTHMAN. Well, Mr. Speaker, while we were on break for the last 
2 weeks, I spent some time at the southern border in three sectors, the 
San Diego sector, the El Centro sector, and the Yuma sector. And I 
think it is important that we try to educate the Chair of what is going 
down there.
  I will start off by just talking about raw numbers that were recently 
released. And so our listeners understand, when you talk about the 
border, there are two groups: There are people who want to find the 
Border Patrol and check in and get a future date for a hearing as they 
ask for asylum; and there are people who sneak across, which we refer 
to as gotaways.
  For certain reasons that I will soon address, the number of gotaways 
recently went up dramatically. And the number of gotaways is always an 
estimate because we don't catch them, we don't interview them. They are 
people who got away into the interior of the United States.
  But we believe right now, or the Border Patrol believes, that in 
March, there were 62,000 gotaways; people who were not interviewed; 
people who we don't know who they are, who snuck in the country.
  We also believe in March there were 90,000 people let in the country 
by the Border Patrol, usually asking for an asylum claim.
  When we combine these two numbers--and by the way, there are other 
people who are turned around, and that is why you sometimes hear people 
say there were 220,000 contacts in March, which is true, but not all of 
those people were let in the country.
  We do believe 152,000 people were let in the country. At least in the 
last 3 years, and as far as I know, forever, that is the highest number 
of people who have been let in the United States in 1 month. By way of 
comparison, a year ago, in March, we were at 63,000. So we went up from 
63,000 to 153,000.
  And if you go before March 2021, March 2020, coincidentally, a 
different President, we were at 11,000. So we have gone from 11,000 in 
March of 2020, to 63,000, to 152,000. That is a crisis by any standard.
  Now, you might say, why are there so many more gotaways? Because when 
so many people are turning themselves in at the border--and by the way, 
there are about 10,000 unaccompanied minors who were let in this March 
as well, and it takes the Border Patrol a longer period of time to 
process the minors.
  When there are so many people that have to be processed, the Border 
Patrol spends all their time doing paperwork and not guarding the 
border. There was a time when the Border Patrol reported to work and 
they guarded the border. Now, we were told in the sectors that I was at 
that 70 percent of the Border Patrol, when they show up at work, start 
doing paperwork. By the time their shift is over, 90 percent of the 
Border Patrol is doing paperwork, which is one of the reasons why so 
many more people are sneaking across the border.
  By the way, if you wanted to take illegal drugs into the country, how 
would do you it? Would you turn yourself into the Border Patrol or 
would you try to sneak across? Which is why, right now, we believe, 
there are many more illegal drugs, including fentanyl, coming into the 
country now than there were in the past.
  There are less drugs being confiscated, way less drugs being 
confiscated, and for the same reason. If the Border Patrol is not 
guarding the border, more people sneak across with the drugs and less 
people are caught.
  So, in any event, that by itself is enough that should just alarm the 
people of this body, as well as the American public is saying, what is 
going on,

[[Page H4569]]

from 11,000 2 years ago to 63,000 a year ago, to 153,000 today.
  We also want to talk, like I did, about the number of drugs. When I 
got this job, which seems just like yesterday, but it was 7 years ago, 
there were about 47,000 Americans who died every year of illegal drugs, 
and that was a big number.
  All of us politicians were supposed to say something and have a plan 
because what are we going to do? 47,000 Americans dying every year of 
illegal drugs. And we passed more money, and we passed things out for 
treatment.
  And 7 years later, we have gone from 47,000--by way of comparison, 
57,000 Americans died in the Vietnam war--we are now at 110,000, 
110,000 people. For people my age, that is twice as many as the number 
of people, combat troops, that died Vietnam in a 12-year period. That 
was 57,000; protests in the street. We have got to stop this. 57,000 
Americans have died.
  Now, every year, 110,000 Americans are dying of illegal drug 
overdoses. What should we be doing?
  We could use more technology, so when people do come in and try to 
sneak in drugs, where the Border Patrol is monitoring things, they are 
more likely to catch the drugs.
  I personally love the dogs. The dogs do a tremendous job at the 
border when people try to sneak across the San Diego sector and put 
fentanyl or drugs in a truck or a car, those are things that should be 
unquestionably in the budget. And if we would do that sort of thing, 
maybe it would put a little bit of brakes on the illegal drugs.
  Another thing we learned down at the border is the increasing variety 
of countries that are coming here. You have to ask yourselves why that 
is.
  Two Monday nights ago, I was at the border and we saw two groups of 
people in a relatively short period of time come into Yuma; groups of 
70 or 80 people. Where are they from?
  I think the average American thinks Cuba, Guatemala. No, from Peru, 
Colombia, Venezuela, Cuba, Bangladesh, India, Uzbekistan. Okay, from 
all around the globe.
  Now, you might say why are people coming here from all around the 
globe? Well, first of all, why would anybody not like to be an 
American?
  But secondly, because the Mexican drug cartels, I am told, and have 
been told by every Border Patrol agent in every sector over the last 
year and a half, the Mexican drug cartels are right now making more 
money smuggling people across the border than drugs across the border.

                              {time}  1915

  That is because, depending upon where you are coming from, $8,000, 
$9,000, $15,000--I am told, from Asia, $20,000--to get somebody in 
here. When you are making that kind of money, it is not surprising that 
they would be educating the whole world that now is the time to come 
into the United States.
  They have pointed out to me that these are not necessarily poor, 
desperate people, by the standards of their home countries. In fact, 
some of them appear to the Border Patrol to be relatively well-off. 
They do not look poorly fed. The Border Patrol estimates 90 to 95 
percent of them have a cell phone. There was a time in the not-too-
distant past that that meant you were well-off.
  I am not good at judging clothes, but we are told that the shoes or 
the purses or whatever, the Border Patrol can tell, are a sign that 
these are not necessarily poor people. They are just people who realize 
they are better off in the United States than in their home country.
  There are a lot of Cubans coming across. A lot of these Cubans, even 
though they are saying they want asylum from Cuba, they have thrown 
away their identification from Chile or Colombia or wherever. They had 
fled Cuba to Chile, and now the word is out: Now is the time to come to 
the United States.
  They aren't fleeing oppression in Chile. They are just coming to the 
United States because it is better off. Why wouldn't they?
  But we have to realize that if we are going to continue with the 
current policy, an unlimited number of people would come here. Look 
around the globe. China, Indonesia, Brazil, large countries, almost 
everybody would be better off in America, which is why tens of 
thousands, hundreds of thousands from some of these countries, are 
going to continue to flow here unless we begin to put the brakes on the 
current policies.
  One other thing of interest we found. When these got-aways sneak 
across the southern border in Arizona, they will pay young people, 
kids, over $1,000 to come up and get them at the border and drive them 
to Phoenix, which is kind of interesting, isn't it?
  Another thing for people back home to remember, if they think the 
current hodgepodge system is humanitarian, is the day we were in the 
San Diego sector, where you have a wall that goes, I am guessing, maybe 
a hundred yards into the Pacific Ocean, they found two people on the 
American side had drowned trying to get around there.
  I guess the ocean is a lot more difficult to get around than people 
think. They look out a hundred yards, and they figure that they can 
swim out there, that they can get around. They can't get around, or 
they get in a boat that is not as seaworthy as they think it is. So, 
many people drown in the ocean trying to come here.
  The Mexican Government tells us that more people wind up washing up 
on the Mexican shore than on the American shore because their boats 
sink before they even get around to the American side.
  Of course, it is not just in the ocean that you see people die coming 
here. In the Arizona sector, it is not unusual to have people dehydrate 
to death in the summer sun. Americans, good-natured as we are, 
sometimes put out gallons of water in the desert, hoping that people 
who are dehydrating to death find the gallons of water. But frequently, 
they don't.
  As you get further down the border, in the past, when I have been on 
the Rio Grande border, it is, again, not unusual to have people drown 
in the Rio Grande. It looks like a shallow river, and they don't 
realize the undertow and that sort of thing, and they wind up dying.
  Women who try to come across, particularly women who try to be with 
groups that are got-aways and sneak across, the sheriff of one of the 
counties--and this is another number I find hard to believe, but it is 
the sheriff. He tells me, one of the sheriffs in Arizona, that he 
believes 80 percent of the women who are part of these groups that try 
to be got-aways and sneak across without checking at the Border Patrol, 
80 percent are raped. Isn't that kind of a horrible thing?
  But the word is out around the world: Now is the time to come across. 
And that is what happens.
  In any event, I encourage the American public and encourage people of 
all parties here, and especially the Biden administration, to get them 
going a little, to realize, right now, it is 150,000 people a month. If 
they change the policy in June like they are talking, the Border Patrol 
believes that you are going to be working your way up to, like, 
400,000, 500,000 a month, which, again, I find hard to believe, but you 
have to figure the Border Patrol are the experts on this sort of thing.
  It shouldn't be that difficult to find a good system, and no other 
country would stand for this. I made the point about a year ago, and it 
may be tardy now, but I do think to allow unlimited people to come here 
makes the American Government and the current administration look weak.
  I think as far as what happened to Ukraine and what may happen 
someday in Taiwan, when they look at the United States and say we have 
a President who is allowing 150,000 people a month to come here and 
doing nothing about it, I just think it screams America is no longer 
the leader in the world.
  In any event, I hope steps are taken. Hire more Border Patrol, hire 
more dogs, complete the wall, which would be a big step in the right 
direction as well, and go back to the policy of allowing people to be 
held on the Mexican side of the border prior to coming across here 
because people are not going to pay the Mexican drug cartels $10,000 or 
$15,000 to sit on the Mexican side of the border and hope that the 
hearing goes their way.
  Again, to emphasize the number, 2 years ago, 11,000 a month; now, 
152,000 a month. People shrug their shoulders and say: What could we 
do? Well, we could adopt the policies we had when we were at 11,000 a 
month. That would be a good start. In any event, this is

[[Page H4570]]

what we learned on the border 2 weeks ago.
  Earlier today, we addressed the Ukraine situation, and I am 
continually disappointed in the media in this country for not 
addressing the Ukrainian famine of 90 years ago. I don't know how you 
can report on this war between Ukraine and Russia and not talk about, 
depending on who is doing the counting, the 5 to 10 million Ukrainians 
who were starved to death by the Communist governments in 1932.

  Even, at the time, the American press was shameless. We were in a 
situation in which a reporter for The New York Times, Walter Duranty, 
hid this great starvation from the American public and the Western 
world.
  As a result, without the West being able to weigh in or the world 
being able to weigh in, about 5 to 15 million people, I am guessing 
more like 5 or 6 million, starved to death.
  When we talk about why the Ukrainians are fighting so hard, how can 
you talk about that without talking about the history between the then-
Communist Government of Russia and also the communists, quite frankly, 
who ran Ukraine at the time and the civilians who wound up starving to 
death?
  You read first-person accounts of all the people dying. You realize 
how, 90 years later, that must still be something that everybody learns 
about in that country.
  Like I said, one of the great disappointments is the mainstream media 
has not talked about it. Why don't they talk about it?
  Is it because they didn't talk about it in 1932 because their 
reporters were so left of left, they apparently didn't want to 
embarrass the Soviet Union with what was going on? Is it because our 
reporters today are so left of left and so in love with leftwing 
governments that they don't want to embarrass them by pointing out the 
mass murder that they were responsible for 90 years ago?
  In any event, I encourage all Americans to Google the Ukrainian 
famine and read some first-person accounts of what was going on down 
there. I encourage any members of the media who sometimes, I think, 
spend time on nonissues to educate the American public a little bit on 
what was going on between Russia and Ukraine 90 years ago this year.
  Now, the final issue which we have to talk about, and I think is the 
most important issue of America under normal circumstances when our 
country is not being overrun at the southern border and when we are not 
facing world war in Ukraine, and that is the continuous policy, 
encouraged more by the Biden administration in their Build Back Better 
bill, another thing he is doing, to have a means-tested welfare program 
that discourages work and encourages the breakdown of the family.
  Understand the qualifications, and there are over 80 means-tested 
programs, some of them more well-known. One is food stamps; TANF, which 
is a cash grant; public housing; earned income tax credit; Pell grants. 
All of these programs are based on whether or not you are considered to 
be in poverty.
  If you have a married couple in which both are working or one has a 
somewhat middle-class job, you will not be considered in poverty, and 
you are not eligible for these programs. But if you have a single 
parent who is not working or working a little bit, the government 
considers you in poverty.
  Once you are in poverty, food stamps, TANF, public housing, which is 
a big one--I think they underestimate the draw that public housing has, 
and I can talk about that in a second. The earned income tax credit can 
easily be a check of $6,000, $7,000, or $8,000 coming in every tax 
season. Pell grants, the opportunity for almost free college, something 
else that the average person doesn't get, but if you adopt that 
lifestyle, you get it.
  It is not surprising that we have had, going back 70 years, such a 
shift in the way we raise children in this country, a shift from almost 
uniformly a mom and dad at home to a much higher percentage all the 
time without a dad.
  I realize there are a few people out there who don't want a dad at 
home. I will mention one more time Black Lives Matter. On their 
website, when they were riding high about a year and a half ago, they 
were against the traditional nuclear family. Of course, the Marxists, 
Karl Marx himself, did not like the traditional family.
  People sometimes think this has been a coincidence in which we have 
had a breakdown of the traditional family. In part, we have to remember 
that there are people who outright don't like the family.
  In any event, I encourage this body, before they pass any more 
significant legislation, and I encourage the Republicans, if they ever 
get back in the majority again, to look at these programs and see, in a 
country in which we try to treat everybody equally, why we have these 
programs that, in essence, take money from the traditional family and 
send it to the nonnuclear family.
  I have been approached by women a few times in my district wondering 
why their children have to take out big student loans and go 30 or 40 
grand in debt, or maybe they had a sister without a husband in the 
house, and they get free college. I really can't understand why we are 
so prejudiced against the nuclear family.
  But that is what we are in America today, and there is a lot of talk 
about equity or equality. We should talk about the degree to which we 
discriminate against nuclear families in this society and see what we 
can do about trying to put people more on an equitable basis.
  That would be a good thing for the Republican Party to work on if 
they ever do get the majority back, and I hope they do. I think they 
will.
  In any event, I would also hope our conservative think tanks, our 
conservative groups, do more to publicize the prejudice that is going 
on in this society against the nuclear family.
  Mr. Speaker, I believe some fine Congressmen behind me are anxious to 
speak. I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________