[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 16]
[House]
[Pages 22155-22159]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                          ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Kline). Under the Speaker's announced 
policy of January 7, 2003, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Tancredo) 
is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
  Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Speaker, earlier this evening while we were voting 
on the House floor on a number of issues and as conversations develop 
among colleagues here, I had an interesting conversation that I would 
like to recount. A colleague of mine as we were walking across the 
street from our office building over here, the Longworth Office 
Building, said to me, you know, I know that you have had a lot of 
involvement with immigration-related issues and therefore I just wanted 
to talk to you a minute or two about some of the concerns I have. This 
particular individual happens to be a chairman of a committee that has 
oversight in a particularly important area of concern for us all and 
has some responsibilities that I would say overlap into the immigration 
area. He asked me what I thought we needed to do because he recognized 
the particular problem we were in, the peculiar problem we were in, I 
guess, in that we have a huge number of Americans who are concerned 
about this issue, about immigration, immigration reform, and we have a 
great deal of pressure developing, political pressure, I guess we could 
say, to do something about our porous borders and do something about 
the problems that exist as a result of the fact that today 
unfortunately even 2 years after 9/11, the event that transformed 
America in many ways and changed the world in many ways, we have still 
not been able to come to grips with one aspect of this problem and the 
fact is that we all know this, people in this body know this, and yet 
we seem paralyzed to do anything about it.
  I said, well, okay, I have some ideas about this. Of course we went 
on to talk in-depth about what we thought should be done. Underline the 
word ``should'' be done. There was general agreement between the two of 
us, I guess, that much stronger action needed to be taken, that our 
borders are porous and that something had to be done in order to 
control the number of people coming across our borders, north and 
south, into the United States without our permission, for reasons 
sometimes benign, sometimes not so benign. We talked about the things 
that should be in place. Once again I emphasize the word ``should'' be 
in place. Some of the protections that any country would take, some of 
the undertakings that we as Americans should simply say we should look 
at as being the most basic kinds of precautions, that any government 
would undertake in order to protect their own citizens. We talked about 
the need for internal security. We talked about the need for Americans 
to devote more resources to trying to identify those people who are in 
this country, illegally for the most part, and who are here for 
purposes of doing us great harm. And we went through the number of 
problems that we have because, of course, there are many interests that 
are involved here, many political interests that develop that 
complicate the issue of simply securing our own borders.
  It became apparent after a short time, after we talked about the 
amount of drugs that are being brought into this country, illegal drugs 
that are being brought into the country as a result of the fact that 
cartels, especially in Mexico, have realized that their ability to 
transport illegal drugs into this country is great and the profits are 
enormous and that the harm that is being done as a result of that kind 
of activity is well documented. And we talked about the fact that there 
are national security problems involved with porous borders and that 
terrorists, potential terrorists, are able to come into the United 
States, able to work within the United States because, of course, there 
are so many millions of people who are living here illegally, that they 
can blend into the society, they blend into that community, it makes it 
incredibly difficult for us, the Department of Justice, the Department 
of Homeland Security, to identify, to monitor and to interdict these 
people. And then we talked about, of course, just the abuse of our own 
laws, the fact that we recognize that our immigration policies are 
being constructed by States and by localities, by cities and counties 
throughout the United States that are developing policies and laws that 
actually aid and abet the criminal activity we call illegal 
immigration.
  And all of this devolved into one common theme. Our borders are 
porous and we need to do something about that. As amazing as that 
sounds, it is still a difficult concept for many people in this body 
and in the administration, apparently, to get. But our borders are 
porous and there are consequences as a result of this situation.
  I tell you about this and I relate this conversation because of the 
way it ended. There was, as I say, agreement between the two of us as 
to what the problem actually is. There was also an agreement between 
the two of us as to why we cannot solve that problem and that is what 
is amazing to me and I guess why I want to start off my discussion this 
evening with telling you about this conversation, because at one point 
this gentleman said to me, you know, we do not have the political will 
to secure our own borders. That is, of course, something I have said 
many times on this floor. It is something I have said in speeches I 
have given all over this Nation. But hearing this from another Member, 
a Member who is, I might say, not identified as being part of our 
Immigration Reform Caucus or someone who is very high profile but 
nonetheless a very respected Member of this body. As I say, a committee 
chairman. He said, and I want to say it again, we do not have the 
political will to secure the border. What a statement. And in an 
absolutely truthful statement, a statement we all know in our heart of 
hearts is accurate but a statement that we do not want exploited, a 
statement that we do not want to be made public. But it is public 
knowledge, Mr. Speaker. We may think we are the only ones here that 
know this dirty little secret, but I assure you that Americans know and 
understand that there is this problem. Many millions of Americans 
understand that there is a problem but perhaps they do not know why and 
they ask me all of the time. I get I do not know how many letters and 
e-mails and calls to my office. Over and over again the question is, 
why can't we do something about this? Day after day, week after week, 
month after month, year after year we talk about the problem. There are 
countless news reports about the fact that we cannot control our own 
borders, about the fact that people are coming across and that we 
choose to do little if anything about it. People say to me, why is this 
happening, Congressman? I can only tell them what my colleague said to 
me. We do not have the

[[Page 22156]]

political will to secure our borders. I assure you, Mr. Speaker, we 
have the technical ability to do so. We have the resources. We have the 
technological attributes necessary, combined with human resources to 
secure our borders. We can do it. It is a fallacy, it is a canard to 
stand up in front of any group and say it is impossible, we must figure 
out a different way to defend America rather than defending our 
borders. When people say that, Mr. Speaker, what they are saying is 
this: I choose not to defend and secure our border, because there are 
political ramifications that I fear. This is what we should read into 
any statement given by any politician, whether they be Members of this 
body or the other body or running for any position, elected position in 
the State, in any State of the Nation, because this issue has reached 
that point where it is now a State and local issue, because we have 
States in the Nation that are trying to develop their own immigration 
policy, sometimes because they are attempting to fill the vacuum 
created by the lack of involvement by the Federal Government and 
sometimes because they are trying to pander to political constituencies 
that they believe will help them retain or obtain power, political 
power.
  Recently we have seen something happen that points this up in a way I 
guess I could never have thought of. The old issue about truth being 
stranger than fiction, it really works here, because what if I had come 
to this floor, say, 3 or 4 years ago and said, Mr. Speaker and Members, 
I can envision a time when States will actually be doing things like 
giving driver's licenses which in many respects, and many times 
referred to as the keys to the kingdom in America, a driver's license, 
what if I had said, I think there are going to be States in this Nation 
that actually are going to give illegal aliens driver's licenses?
  Of course there would have been derision, there would have been a 
response we all can identify with, those of us who are concerned about 
this issue, because we have faced that kind of reaction by the press 
and by even our colleagues in the past. They would have said, you are 
such a radical on this issue, you are so off base, you are anti- 
immigrant, you are racist, all of those epithets that they throw out 
every time we talk about immigration and immigration policy. Never 
could this happen that any State in the Nation would give illegal 
immigrants the keys to the kingdom. Yet, of course, that is exactly 
what is happening. Several States in this Nation have, and now the most 
recent, the State of California.

                              {time}  2100

  A Governor so desperate to try to retain power that he signs a bill 
that he had twice vetoed and vetoed with a message that said something 
like this: It is crazy to give people who are here illegally a driver's 
license because we do not know anything about them. We cannot determine 
their background. We do not know who they are. We do not know anything 
about them, and when we give a driver's license like to somebody like 
that, they can use it for nefarious purposes. But he forgot all of 
those veto messages because he is in the process of being recalled by 
the people of the State of California. And he says, oh, this is a great 
idea. Why did I not think of it before? It is absolutely necessary for 
us to give illegal immigrants into this country the ``keys to the 
kingdom.''
  There is only one reason he did that, of course, and that was to gain 
the votes he hopes he will obtain in order to be retained in office. 
This is amazing to all of us. I mean, most Americans look at this and 
understand it for exactly what it is: political pandering in its worst 
form, and yet it has happened. And I hope that we can look at this 
little visual example of the problem: A California driver's license for 
a gentleman named Osama bin Laden, 525 Main Street, Los Angeles, 
California; date of issuance: 9-11. This is a dramatic, perhaps some 
would say overly dramatic, statement we are trying to make here, but 
this is what it takes perhaps to bring some people to their senses. Can 
we keep this from happening?
  Illegal immigration poses a threat to the United States in many, many 
ways, certainly in a national security sense. In a recent article by 
Steve Brown and Chris Coon, they say, ``Governor Gray Davis has opened 
a significant breach in the Nation's homeland security by signing a 
bill allowing illegal immigrants to obtain driver's licenses that bear 
the official seal and full governmental authority of the State of 
California.'' These driver's licenses allow people to open bank 
accounts, make certain purchases, and obtain jobs. ``Driver's licenses 
also serve as the sole ID needed to travel abroad to Mexico, Canada, 
and some Caribbean countries. They allow easy access to air travel and 
car rentals. It is a requirement for obtaining a firearm. Through the 
convenience of the Motor/Voter Act, obtaining a driver's license even 
grants the right to vote, a fundamental right for which generations of 
American blood has been shed and the one sacrosanct facet of 
citizenship. But increasingly, even in the post-9/11 atmosphere of 
heightened security, States are giving away the keys to our country to 
those who aren't even citizens and are, in fact, here illegally.
  ``A recent Federation for American Immigration Reform report 
highlights how States are undermining immigration enforcement and 
throwing the door open wide to terrorist infiltration. Along with 
Sanctuary policies mandating noncooperation between local and Federal 
enforcement, Federation for American Immigration Reform cites the 
issuance of driver's licenses to illegals as one of the key breakdowns 
in homeland security, a conclusion shared by both the FBI and the 
Department of Homeland Security.
  ```All 19 of the 9/11 terrorists possessed one or more of State 
driver's licenses, which they used to blend in, rent apartments, open 
bank accounts, and, ultimately, to board the airplanes they intended to 
crash,' the report notes. `The decision by 13 State legislatures and 
Governors to give driver's licenses to people in this country''' who 
are here ```illegally, people about whom we know nothing, directly 
hinders Federal efforts to address the homeland security threat.'
  ``Gun Owners of America Communications Director Erich Pratt told'' 
this magazine ``that obtaining a driver's license would `absolutely' 
make it easier for illegal aliens to purchase firearms throughout the 
country. `The background check only bounces names against real bad guys 
. . . so yes, if they have what would seem to be proof that they are a 
legal resident,' '' the driver's license, ```obviously, there would be 
nothing on the driver's license to indicate that''' they were here 
illegally. ```Then this really greases the skids of being able to 
purchase firearms from gun stores,' Pratt explained.''
  I am a Representative of the State of Colorado, specifically the 6th 
Congressional District. An incident occurred in my district that is 
often referred to as just the ``Columbine incident.'' Columbine High 
School is in my district, not more than a mile or so from my own home, 
and we all know the tragic consequences of those children who took guns 
into a school and killed 13 students and died at their own hands, the 
two perpetrators. And there was an outcry throughout this Nation, and 
there was a concern raised about the availability of guns to these two 
individuals who committed this heinous act. We had to work through that 
in this body, and we had to work through it as a Nation, and time and 
again I have heard people come to this floor to protest against the 
availability of firearms. Here we have a situation now in several 
States where we have made it enormously easy for someone who is here 
illegally to obtain a firearm. What does that mean? It means that we 
have nothing against which to bounce off this information, as the 
statement here I read a minute ago indicates.
  Someone presents a driver's license. They may have a criminal record 
in other countries. They may have obtained that driver's license 
illegally. They may have used a false identification to obtain the 
driver's license. They may have gone to the Mexican Consulate, let us 
say, and obtained a matricula consular. This is a document

[[Page 22157]]

that is handed out by the Mexican Government to those Mexican nationals 
living in the United States illegally. In California, as a result of 
the bill that was signed by Governor Gray Davis, a person who has 
obtained one of these matricula consular, that is the name of the card, 
can then go and get a driver's license. So even if one is, in fact, a 
citizen of the United States but a felon who has a long, long history 
of transgressions, they can obtain this matricula consular in a 
different name and become a different person just like that. And then 
they take their card to the motor vehicle division in California, and 
they get their driver's license, and then they go buy a gun, and there 
is nothing, there is no record, of course, of who they are, who they 
really are, and therefore, they can obtain this weapon. Why have we not 
heard from the antigun lobby? Why have we not heard from all those 
people who raised such hell when we talk about the possession of 
firearms in America, and they even try to restrict the possession of 
firearms to law-abiding citizens? But they do not say a word about the 
fact that we have just opened the door to millions of people who are 
here illegally and to potentially millions of people who would do harm 
to the Nation and to others if they were able to obtain a firearm 
because they are now able to get a driver's license in one of several 
States, the most important of which, of course, is California.
  Not too long ago, last week, as a matter of fact, I held a press 
conference here, and I had with me several family members of people who 
were killed in the terrorist attacks on our country on 9/11. ``Families 
for a Secure America'' convened on Washington, D.C., to air their 
grievances over the continued lax immigration policies supported by 
lawmakers concerned only about their careers and lobbyists with 
specious ulterior motives.
  ``It is clear,'' they say, ``that the lawyers, lobbyists, ethnic 
power brokers, ideologues, business profiteers, and misguided do-
gooders who don't care about the security of their fellow Americans 
will never stop working to keep America's borders open. Beyond any 
doubt, since the murder of . . . 3,000 innocent people on 9/11, these 
people have shown by their actions that they will never sacrifice their 
power, profits, and ideology for the safety of the American people as a 
whole.''
  This was a quote by Tom Meehan at this press conference that we held. 
And he went on to say: ``And we 9/11 families have learned since the 
murder of our loved ones that this President and most Members of 
Congress will not do the right thing unless they are forced to do so by 
the 70 to 90 percent of Americans that polls show want drastic and 
immediate immigration reform.''
  Lynn Faulkner, who lost his wife in the World Trade Center, pointed 
to politicians ``both liberal and conservative, Republican and 
Democrat'' that continue to push for open borders and loose immigration 
standards.
  ``Though the specifics of the 9/11 attacks may have been unknown to 
the politicians listed above,'' and prior to this he listed the Members 
that he was concerned about, ``and Bill Clinton and President Bush, 
they had to know that additional attacks would follow and that the only 
way to keep terrorists . . . out of our country was to screen the 
people who seek to enter,'' Faulkner said. ``Therefore, we say without 
any reservation that the Members of Congress, the current President, 
and his two predecessors contributed to the murder of our family 
members and the thousands of other victims of September 11.''
  In a callous attempt to save his political career from recall, 
Democrat, California Governor Gray Davis, recently signed legislation 
allowing approximately two million illegals to obtain driver's 
licenses, legislation he has twice vetoed, as I said earlier.
  With the stroke of his pen, while blatantly pandering to the Latino 
vote, Davis quashed his State's border with Mexico. Far from a single-
handed act, he was aided and abetted by the Democrat-dominated 
California legislature, particularly by bill author, Senator Gil 
Cedillo. Cedillo has been pushing this legislation for years under the 
thin premise that new licenses will have increased incentive to obtain 
auto insurance coverage, in turn improving highway safety. An ardent 
member of the taxpayer funded MEChA, which is a ``racist Latino student 
movement demanding annexation of all southwestern States,'' and MEChA, 
by the way, is as close to a Hispanic KKK as I can possibly imagine and 
something, by the way, that the aspiring Governor in California Mr. 
Bustamante belongs to. Cedillo once said, illegals have a right to stay 
because ``they were here first.'' Illegal aliens, he says, have a right 
to stay because they were here first. Given the illegal constituency's 
interests, there is little doubt who they will pull the lever for in 
the upcoming elections at both the State and national level.
  ``I'd like to thank Governor Davis because up until last week, how 
many people in this country knew that illegal immigrants were getting 
driver's licenses?'' the Families of Survivors member Grace Gottschalk, 
whose son was murdered in the World Trade Center, asked.

                              {time}  2115

  ``Here and there you would see something in the press occasionally, 
but when Governor Davis used this as a political tool, passing a bill 
that he had turned down many times because he is now in jeopardy, it 
shows you how political this is and how immigrants are being used.''
  This move has not gone unnoticed by those tasked with securing our 
Nation from the threat of terrorism at home. Asa Hutchinson, Under 
Secretary of Border and Transportation Security, recently said, 
``Certainly we have to review our policy among inspectors on the border 
and their reliance upon driver's licenses. If you do not have integrity 
in the driver's licenses that are issued, the integrity of those 
documents, the securities of those documents, then it really undermines 
the whole premise of allowing U.S. citizens to travel abroad and come 
back with limited proof of U.S. citizenship without a passport. More 
than 160,000 people cross the border in San Diego daily here simply 
flashing a State license allows them to be waved through. It promises 
to be a focal issue in the upcoming California gubernatorial recall 
election.''
  Republican State Senator Tom McClintock, a recall candidate, said the 
only reason for issuing state-approved identification to illegals is 
``to undermine our immigration laws.''
  ``What Gray Davis has done by signing this bill is put politics 
before the people of the State of California,'' Assemblyman Tony 
Strickland said.
  ``The California legislature failed the people of California. 
Governor Gray Davis has failed the people of California when he signed 
the bill into law. He said he didn't care about California, but he 
cares about his job in Sacramento. It is about a last-ditch effort to 
save his career,'' said Assemblyman Dennis Mountjoy.
  The California Republican Assembly has issued a call for the 
referendum to stop the new driver's license ordinance. They hope to 
obtain 373,816 signatures of registered voters within the next 90 days 
to make the March 2004 ballot.
  California Republican Assembly President Mike Spence commented, ``To 
lower the standard for getting a driver's license in this era of al 
Qaeda and the era of identity theft is an attack on every citizen of 
California.''
  The California Republican Assembly has started a Web site to support 
the petition drive.
  Mr. Speaker, it is, again, incredible for us today to think that this 
is happening in California and it is happening in other States. It is 
incredible to think about the fact that many States now give all kinds 
of opportunities and benefits to people who are living here illegally, 
those benefits that have heretofore been given only to people who we 
call citizens, or at least legal residents, of the United States, the 
benefit of citizenship, like having the State taxpayers pay to 
subsidize your child's education, both in K-12 and higher education. 
Now many States say let us do that for illegal immigrants, the benefits 
of social services, the benefits of health care, and, yes, even the 
benefits of voting.

[[Page 22158]]

  What is left? What is left to define the idea or the concept of 
citizenship? What does it mean? Has it any value whatsoever? If 
everyone in this country, regardless of their legal status, can obtain 
all of the benefits afforded to those people who are here legally, then 
what does it mean to be a citizen of this country?
  The distinction is erased, and that is the hope and desire of many of 
the people who actually push these kinds of issues. It is to eventually 
come to a place where borders are eliminated, where people who are here 
can obtain all of the benefits of citizenship by simply being a 
resident.
  There are cities in this Nation that provide people who are here 
illegally with the benefit of voting. College Park, Maryland, comes to 
mind immediately, not too far from here. They call themselves sanctuary 
cities, and you can vote if you can prove you are a resident of the 
city. The Mayor of the District of Columbia not too long ago proposed 
such a thing for residents of the District of Columbia; and of course 
Gray Davis has done exactly the same thing by giving residents of the 
State of California a driver's license, because under motor-voter, they 
now can vote.
  So, what does it matter then when we use the word ``citizenship''? 
There is a recent flap that has developed over the fact that the Bureau 
of Immigration Enforcement has come up with a new oath of citizenship. 
I think they recalled it because there was such a response on the part 
of many people. They were re-writing the oath of citizenship.
  But let me suggest to you that the concern about the actual words 
that are used in that oath, that concern is misplaced, I think, 
because, of course, the oath will eventually mean nothing, because 
citizenship, the concept of it, the reality of it, will mean nothing.
  When we talk about immigration and immigration reform, many people 
think that we are just talking in terms of jobs, the loss of jobs, 
which, of course, is a real concern. Many people are just talking about 
the fear that we have as a result of our Nation being balkanized, being 
divided up into all kinds of sub-groups, of victimized groups, that 
refuse to become part of the American mainstream, that do not even wish 
to integrate into our society.
  But this debate about illegal immigration is even broader than that. 
I believe with all of my heart, Mr. Speaker, that massive immigration 
into the country, both legal and illegal, combined with this cult of 
multi-culturalism that permeates our society and tells people that they 
should not immigrate into the American mainstream and they should keep 
their own language and their own political relationship and political 
affiliation to country of origin, this is a dagger pointed at the heart 
of America.
  It is as dangerous as al Qaeda; it is as dangerous as any terrorist 
out there who is plotting to do something terrible to this country. 
Because, Mr. Speaker, I will tell you now that if we do not know who we 
are as a Nation, if we are divided up into all these camps, into these 
groups, victimized sub-groups in America, then we will have no strong 
desire to save our civilization and our way of life, because we do not 
know what it is, we do not know who we are, we do not know what holds 
us together, we do not know what binds us together as a Nation.
  We can all revel in and enjoy the differences that we have in this 
country, the cultural distinctions that give us such a rich texture as 
a Nation. We can enjoy it. I certainly do. But that is a far cry from 
disassociating oneself from this country and actually seeking only the 
economic benefits that it can provide, while simultaneously trying to 
connect oneself, or, I should say, retain one's connections to 
countries of origin, which, if they were so great, if those countries 
of origin are so wonderful, one wonders why millions of people have 
sought to leave them.
  In a recent Los Angeles Times article, September 15, 2 days ago, by 
Claire Luna, she states that ``painted on the cheeks of children 
waiving grandly from a balcony and planted in women's hairdos, Mexican 
flags were on display everywhere Sunday in Santa Ana as tens of 
thousands of people showed pride for their home country.''
  Showed pride for their home country. What does that mean? What is 
their home country? Do they not live here? Do they not obtain the 
benefits of living in this land? Do they not call themselves Americans? 
Do they not think of themselves as Americans?
  Mr. Speaker, if I asked you what is your home country, if I asked 
anybody in this body what is their home country, if I asked any 
American citizen out there, what is their home country, how many would 
answer to me some country other than the United States of America?
  Now, I am only a third-generation American. My grandparents came here 
from Italy. But never, ever, ever, have I thought of myself as anything 
but an American. Never have I thought of my home country as anything 
but America.
  ``The Fiesta de las Americas parade commemorating Mexican 
Independence Day drew the largest crowd in its 15-year history,'' 
police said. For 2 hours, spectators cheered for their home states,'' 
home states, ``in Mexico, as girls in traditional dress pranced among 
marching bands, government dignitaries and mariachi floats. It is so 
important that all Mexicans remember how their liberty was won.''
  Their liberty, if they are living here, was won by people who 
sacrificed their lives in the fight against Great Britain. That is how 
their liberty was won.
  ``The parade helps reaffirm our pride in our love of Mexico.''
  Well, Mexico is a wonderful country. I do not dispute that, and I do 
not suggest for a moment that anyone should, if they are from Mexico, 
should forget about it or not understand that they have that heritage. 
But there is something happening here, Mr. Speaker, that deserves our 
attention, because this is what I am talking about, about a country 
being divided into all of these sub-groups, being balkanized.
  This article goes on to say that, ``Corona, the vending machine 
stocker, was watching the parade with his brother-in-law Roberto Mundo, 
38, and Mundo's two children. To shield his eyes from the sun, Corona 
shoved a piece of cardboard over his head and was reduced to wordless 
glee when passing Orange County Sheriff Mike Carona gave his headgear a 
thumbs-up. His power of speech returned when a dozen folks and women 
passed by on a Budweiser beer float. `You are beautiful,' he screamed 
happily in Spanish, and when they threw him a poster. `People used to 
be too scared of being deported to come to something as public as 
this,' Mundo said, `but times have changed. Now people aren't scared to 
show their pride.' ''
  So what he is saying here is, of course, that many, many of the 
people who were on the street were here illegally, but they do not care 
anymore about the fact that they are here illegally. They are not 
afraid, they are not concerned, because they know that this government 
does not have the will to enforce our own immigration policy.
  There is a book, Mr. Speaker, in closing, that I would certainly 
suggest should be mandatory reading for every American citizen. It is 
called ``Mexifornia: A State of Becoming,'' by Victor Davis Hanson. I 
will just read something from the cover:
  ``Cutting through the lies of race-hacks, multi-cult commissars and 
their guilty white enablers, fifth generation Californian Victor Davis 
Hanson tells the brutal truth about Mexican immigration to California. 
Combining social-science fact with the personal experience of living in 
the San Joaquin Valley, immigration's ground zero, Hanson shows that 
discarding the old paradigm of immigrant assimilation in favor of the 
fantasies of identity politics victimhood has seriously compromised the 
process of turning into Americans the millions of hard-working Mexicans 
who desperately want the freedom and prosperity underwritten by the 
very values that the multi-cult industry disparages. No one concerned 
with immigration and its impact on America can afford to miss this 
tough and brilliant book.''
  And I certainly agree. ``Mexifornia: A State of Becoming.''
  California is a State I guess that represents what we are all, every 
State in

[[Page 22159]]

the Nation, in some stage of becoming, somewhat transformed. To some, 
even in this body, that is a good idea. That is something to which they 
look forward, a Nation that no longer understands its roots, a Nation 
that is divided, a Nation that is balkanized, a Nation that is just a 
place of residents and not of citizens.

                              {time}  2130

  Mr. Speaker, that is where we are going. That is where we are headed. 
And most Americans know it. And they ask their representatives in this 
government to do something about it. And yet I have to tell them when 
they ask me why we cannot and why we ignore this, I have to tell them 
that there is no political will to secure our own borders.
  It is a shameful fact, Mr. Speaker. It is one I wish I did not have 
to express and did not have to state. But it is the truth. I hope it 
will soon change.

                          ____________________