[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 14]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 18668-18669]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




TRANSPORTATION, TREASURY, AND INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 
                                  2005

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                          HON. ROBERT MENENDEZ

                             of new jersey

                    in the house of representatives

                      Tuesday, September 14, 2004

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 5025) making 
     appropriations for the Departments of Transportation and 
     Treasury, and independent agencies for the fiscal year ending 
     September 30, 2005, and for other purposes:

  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Oxley-
Frank amendment that would strike section 216 from the Transportation 
Appropriations bill.
  Last July, I stood on this floor and said that the Hostettler 
amendment to the Foreign Relation Authorization Act was ``a thinly 
veiled attempt to end something called the matricula consular.'' Well, 
here we are a year later and there is no longer a pretense as to what 
my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are trying to accomplish.
  During consideration at the Appropriations Subcommittee level, 
Representative Culberson offered an amendment that prohibits the 
Department of the Treasury from implementing regulations which allow 
Mexico's matricula consular card to be used as a form of identification 
when opening a bank account. This amendment was retained at the full 
committee even though Treasury Secretary Snow wrote in July to the 
chairman requesting that this specific provision be removed.
  Over and over again, select Members on the other side of the aisle 
have shown their true feelings about issues of the immigrant 
communities, and often, specifically the Hispanic community. Section 
216 is no exception since it targets Mexican nationals. Why do I say 
this? Because only the matricula consular, out of all the identity 
documents in the United States, would be explicitly banned by this 
section of the bill.
  Contrary to what the supporters of section 216 contend, Mexico and 
other foreign governments have been issuing consular identification 
cards to foreign nationals in the United States precisely following the 
guidelines established by the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.
  Representative Culberson implies that it is impossible to verify the 
true identity of a person who holds a matricula consular card because 
they can be obtained fraudulently. This is equally as true of other ID 
cards as with U.S. driver's licenses. In fact, 7 of the 19 terrorist 
hijackers of September 11 were known to have illegally obtained 
Virginia's drivers licenses. Yet this provision would ban only the 
matricula consular, which has been issued by the Embassy of Mexico for 
over 132 years.
  Let's talk about what this whole debate is really about. It is about 
our country's public safety and national security, our homeland 
security, and our financial security.
  Use of the Mexican consular identification card improves our Nation's 
public safety and national security because it provides a reliable and 
accurate method to identify Mexican nationals. Today, approximately 
1,100 police departments accept the matricula consular to identify 
suspects, witnesses, and people who report crimes and suspicious 
activity.
  Use of the Mexican consular identification card improves our Nation's 
homeland security. It combats the financing of international terrorism 
and money laundering by ensuring that U.S. financial institutions have 
accurate and reliable information on their clients.
  And use of the matricula consular improves our nation's financial 
security and economy and prevents people from sending money illegally 
across the border. With this card, Mexican workers in the United States 
can send money legally using the banking system, which functions within 
federal law. Today, approximately 350 financial institutions accept the 
card as a valid form of identification.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment is supported by:
  The Bush White House in a Statement of Administration Policy dated 
today;

[[Page 18669]]

  The Department of Treasury in a letter from Secretary Snow dated 
yesterday;
  The Department of Justice, including the FBI;
  A large part of the financial services sector: The American Bankers 
Association; America's Community Bankers; the Bankers' Association for 
Finance and Trade; the National Association of Federal Credit Unions; 
the Credit Union National Association; the Financial Services 
Roundtable; the Independent Community Bankers of America; the 
Securities Industry Association;
  The National Council of La Raza;
  The Mexican American Legal Defense Educational Fund; and
  The National Immigration Law Center.
  Finally, over 80 percent of the 34,000 comments received on the 
actual Treasury Department rulemaking under Section 326 of the USA 
PATRIOT Act agreed with the original regulations.
  So, this amendment is broadly supported because it is the right thing 
to do for our country's national security, homeland security, and 
financial security. I strongly urge my colleagues to vote for the 
Oxley-Frank amendment and against this outrageous and dangerous 
provision.

                          ____________________