[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 158 (2012), Part 2]
[House]
[Pages 2397-2402]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                            BORDER SECURITY

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 5, 2011, the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop) is recognized for 
60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. I thank you, Mr. Speaker.
  I am here tonight to talk about one of the issues that is of extreme 
significance. In fact, in every town hall meeting I've ever held, one 
of the first questions that's asked, if not the first question, is 
about illegal entry into this country and is about, specifically, 
border security.
  So in talking about what the issue is before us, this is a map of the 
United States that is divided into the Border Patrol sectors, the areas 
that the Border Patrol has. As you will see, if you can, from the 
numbers, there is a vast difference in the numbers of people coming 
illegally into this country based on the sectors.
  If you go to the sector of the State of Maine, the last time we had 
verifiable figures, the last time we had complete figures from the 
Border Patrol and from the Department of Homeland Security, only 56 
illegals were apprehended trying to get into Maine, which has to tell 
you that there are not a whole lot of people from Nova Scotia who are 
trying to come over here and take hockey jobs. In fact, I have to think 
they probably looked at them as tourists.
  But if you look down here in the area in blue, the Tucson, Arizona, 
sector, which is only part of Arizona--it's not the entire State of 
Arizona--in the last 2 years for which we have complete data, 51 
percent, or a quarter of a million people, came through Arizona. In 
fact, 51 percent of all of the people who illegally came into the 
United States and who were apprehended came through the Tucson, 
Arizona, sector and were apprehended in the Tucson, Arizona, sector. 
This has to bring about the simple question of why.
  Why is this part of Arizona the obvious entrance of choice of those 
trying to get into this country illegally? I really think the answer 
lies in the next chart.
  This is the borderland along our southern border. The black line is 
100 miles from the border, which is, by definition, both by statute and 
judicial decision, the legal jurisdiction of our Border Patrol. The 
area in red is the area that is owned by the Federal Government in 
those areas. You'll see that that specific area of Arizona--almost 80 
percent of that--is owned by the Federal Government. That's almost 21 
million acres of land owned by the Federal Government, which is in 
sharp contrast to, say, the Texas border and especially the northern 
border. Of that roughly 21 million acres, an area the size of the 
States of Connecticut and Delaware

[[Page 2398]]

combined is wilderness area, and that doesn't include also areas that 
are endangered species habitats.
  Those areas that are red are where we find the Federal Government 
prohibiting the Border Patrol from doing its job. The Border Patrol 
actually has access in the white areas--private property--to do their 
job. It is only when the Federal Government stops the Federal Border 
Patrol from doing their job on Federal property that we seem to have a 
problem.
  Unfortunately, those coming into the country seem to realize that 
this area where the Federal Government stops the Federal Border Patrol 
on Federal land, as unusual and bizarre as that seems, becomes the 
entrance of choice for their coming into this country. I'm not just 
talking about immigrants, people who are coming over here to try to 
find jobs in some particular way. This is the entrance of choice of the 
drug cartels. The Border Patrol will tell you privately that their best 
estimate--only an estimate--is that 40 percent of those coming into 
this area of Arizona, in fact, into the country, are part of the drug 
cartel.

                              {time}  1800

  They don't care if the economy is going up and down. They don't care 
if there is E-Verify or not. They are still trying to come into this 
country. They will tell you, roughly 80 percent of the illegal drugs 
coming into this country are still coming by the drug cartel area.
  What is worse, it is not just the drug cartel. This is also the kind 
of human degradation that is taking place.
  There is a Seattle Times story that ran in 2009, and the title was, 
``Pacific pair accused of smuggling, enslaving illegal Mexican 
immigrants.'' The story was about the human trafficking we have that is 
a very serious problem and the kinds of violent acts that are used 
against women and children on this Federal property. The Seattle Times 
went on to illustrate the kinds of violent acts against humanity that 
are happening right here on American soil, the kinds of numerous 
accounts of rape and other violent acts that are taking place against 
women and children here.
  The counties--and I have been down there on the border and I have 
seen evidence of this--have ample evidence, if you go along these 
trafficking routes, of rape trees in which the drug cartel members, 
sometimes other illegal immigrants, will rape females and then force 
the victim to leave an article of clothing, usually an undergarment, on 
the trees and make this as if it is a type of monument to the horrible 
activity that is taking place on government land. Yet still we do not 
give the Border Patrol access on government land that they have on 
private property.
  We are a sovereign country and, by definition, a sovereign country 
controls its borders, and that should be what we are doing. 
Unfortunately, we are not doing that at all.
  This is what the border down there in Arizona will look like from the 
air. You see, going along here is a fence--the fence doesn't go all the 
way up the mountainside; there are some areas in which fencing does not 
make sense and cannot be done--and there is one road that goes along 
the fence. That is the access that our Border Patrol has in this 
particular area, and in some cases that becomes the sole access.
  If you talk to the Border Patrol agents by themselves, when they will 
be honest with you, they will clearly tell you they don't need more 
money to fight this problem on the border. They don't necessarily need 
more personnel. What they need is access, east-west access so they can 
go somewhere other than along the one road that follows the border line 
and the border fence. That is what becomes extremely significant.
  What is so bizarre, what is so bizarre in that is that the Border 
Patrol must obtain permission or a permit from Federal land management 
agencies before its agents can maintain roads or install surveillance 
equipment on the lands or do what we ask them to do; and that, frankly, 
is simply wrong and, once again, ludicrous.
  Now, you see, it's one of those odd things that we stop the Border 
Patrol from doing their job and, instead, we find that environmental 
degradation is taking place, but not by the Border Patrol, not by any 
other American citizens, but by those who are illegally coming across.
  This simply is one of the pictures of the kinds of trash that is left 
behind on private property and on public property, tons of which must 
be picked up, resulting from the fact that we do not have a Border 
Patrol that does have ability to patrol these particular areas. That's 
what's left behind.
  I hate to say this, but the drug cartel who was coming over doesn't 
care about wilderness designation. They don't care about endangered 
species habitat. They don't care about the endangered species--unless 
it can be eaten. What they do is simply leave behind all of the trash 
as they are coming through. There is something wrong with that.
  This is another picture of what takes place there on the border. The 
cactus, this time being cacti along the border, is an endangered 
species that has been cut down by the drug cartels. If any other 
American did that, that becomes a felony. For them, all this is is a 
nice roadblock along one of the few roads that is there. So when 
somebody else comes down there in a vehicle and stops, they are a 
perfect target for mugging and robbing and anything they want. You will 
find some of the cacti that's down there has graffiti on it, which 
shows certain areas where the cartel is in operation.
  The last couple of years, there have been some major fires down there 
along the southern border. The last large fire that went through 
Arizona and spilled over into New Mexico was a fire that started in two 
parts. The part up in northern Arizona probably was started by a 
camper, but in southern Arizona, that wasn't it. The Forest Service has 
yet to determine who started that fire that spilled over into New 
Mexico and cost hundreds of millions of dollars in damage. They have 
ruled out everyone except, well, illegal aliens that happened to be 
close to the known smuggling trails where the fire actually started.
  You see, what happens down there is there are three types of fires 
that are started, two of them on purpose:
  One is a distress fire, in which case if somebody coming across the 
border is in a dire situation, lost their ability to go any further and 
they need rescuing, you start a fire, because then obviously the 
firefighters will come in and you will get rescued.
  There are also diversion fires started specifically. A diversion fire 
is to make sure that when the fire starts over here and everyone runs 
over there to stop the fire, it means over here is now open for your 
entry into this country. The drug cartels have this down to a habit and 
a style all of their own.
  The third part is simply an accidental fire. I think the assumption 
is that the last fires that were done down there were probably 
accidental fires, started indeed by those coming across the border 
illegally, but definitely not for a diversion and not for a 
distraction, just it was a problem that caused us an enormous amount of 
loss of public wealth and public time in trying to fix that particular 
problem.
  The Department of the Interior claims that the 1964 Wilderness Act 
takes precedence over everything else that is taking place on this 
property. They say that their duties are to fulfill this particular 
act, not necessarily to control the border. In fact, one of the letters 
that they sent reads very carefully. It says:

       Issues remain, and we seek your (the Border Patrol's) 
     assistance in resolving them as quickly as possible in order 
     to prevent the significant, and perhaps irreversible, 
     environmental damage we believe is imminent. Specifically, we 
     are concerned with operating vehicles anywhere other than 
     roads, road dragging, and other activities that could cause 
     erosion and mobilize fragile hydric soil characteristic of 
     the San Bernadino Wildlife Refuge.

  What that says, in simple terms, is it doesn't really matter what the 
Border Patrol does; you don't want them to disturb the soil even if it 
means being able to apprehend somebody illegal, especially the drug 
cartels coming over there. They would rather have the soil

[[Page 2399]]

not bothered than actually find somebody who is entering this country 
illegally, especially part of the drug cartels.
  This is where I started. This is a response, once again, from the 
Department of the Interior to the Border Patrol on this area:

       The issue of emergency vehicle access by the U.S. Customs 
     and Border Protection on San Bernadino Wildlife Refuge has 
     been in dispute over the past few months. The recent exchange 
     of letters from our respective offices failed to clearly 
     identify the needs of our two agencies and reach agreement on 
     how to best proceed.

  Now, once again, from my point of view, the way to best proceed is to 
stop the drug cartels from smuggling illegal drugs over here, not 
necessarily what took place. In fact, what they decided then, it says 
the Federal land managers believe it is their duty to enforce 
restrictive laws associated with the Wilderness Act, even if it helps 
the drug cartel in their drug trafficking and the human smuggling and 
other criminal activities that are occurring as they cross into the 
United States.
  The chief also went on to say:
  ``Emergency circumstances exist''--that's nice of them--``when human 
life, health, and safety of persons within this area must be 
immediately addressed. Access to the refuge by the Border Patrol will 
be limited to the use of established administrative roads. However, you 
may access on foot to patrol or apprehend suspects.''

                              {time}  1810

  Managers of the land are dictating to the Border Patrol how they will 
do their job. I might add that this definition of what considers the 
chance of a Border Patrol actually going in and doing something rapidly 
is not what the memo of understanding between the Department of the 
Interior and the Department of Homeland Security actually said. They 
came up with their own definition to stop the Border Patrol from doing 
it.
  Now, under this recommendation, the Border Patrol has to drive around 
this refuge, which adds hours to get to the other side, which 
obviously, if you're trying to capture somebody, something just doesn't 
work.
  So since that's what's taking place, how does the Department of the 
Interior decide to solve the problem? It's easy; they put up gates. 
That was the result of that exchange on how to solve the problem of 
controlling our southern border. What the Department of the Interior 
simply did is they put up a gate with a lock on it on the San 
Bernardino National Wildlife Refuge.
  It's amazing that they thought this solves the problem, because what 
this gate does is block out the Border Patrol from going into this 
area. It doesn't lock out anyone else. It doesn't lock out the drug 
cartel, the human traffickers, or anyone else from trying to come into 
this particular area.
  Early on when Janet Napolitano became head of Homeland Security, we 
received a couple of letters from her. They actually said what the 
issue was down there on the border with the Border Patrol. She wrote:
  ``One issue affecting the efficacy of the Border Patrol operations 
within wilderness is prohibitions against mechanical conveyances''--
that's like four-wheelers--or in the air. ``The U.S. Border Patrol 
regularly depends on these conveyances, the removal of such advantage 
being generally detrimental to its ability to accomplish the national 
security missions.''
  In simple language, if you stop us from going on motorized vehicles 
into these areas, we can't catch the bad guys.

       This includes that these types of restrictions can impact 
     the efficacy of operations and be a hindrance to the 
     maintenance of officer safety.

  It makes their job more difficult and it puts them at risk. She 
continued:

       For example, it may be inadvisable for officer safety to 
     wait for the arrival of horses for pursuit purposes, or to 
     attempt to apprehend smuggling vehicles within the wilderness 
     with a less capable form of transportation.

  In simple words, again, if the idea is of the Department of the 
Interior that the Border Patrol, when they come to one of these special 
areas, have to go on foot, they have to chase them down on foot or wait 
till a horse arrives so they can chase them down on horse, while the 
drug cartels are using motorized vehicles, that flat out does not make 
sense. But that is, indeed, what is happening down there.
  She continued on with a different correspondence to say that it 
illustrates that in areas where the Border Patrol has been given 
access, the regrowth and rehabilitation of the land has improved.
  But ``overall, the removal of cross-border violators''--stopping the 
drug cartel from coming across the border--``from public lands is a 
value to the environment as well as to the mission of the land 
managers. The validity of this statement was evidenced recently when 
the vehicle fence project south of the Buenos Aires National Wildlife 
Refuge received praise from a Fish and Wildlife biologist. The 
biologist was encouraged by the regrowth and rehabilitation taking 
place naturally to the north of the vehicle fence subsequent to its 
installation.''
  Now, what she was saying very simply is, when you stop the Border 
Patrol from being able to do their job, they don't do their job and the 
bad guys come across. And the bad guys don't care at all about the 
environment or what the laws are or what the rules are. And if you are 
able to stop them, then all of the degradation that takes place by the 
drug cartel coming across the border can be fixed, and can be fixed 
well.
  Now, I have to admit that was early on in her administration with the 
Department of Homeland Security. I have to admit also, of late, that 
the Department of Homeland Security has been told to simply tell us 
everything is going fine down there on the border. Things are getting 
better. We are working together nicely.
  It's not quite the same story I got on the trips down there to the 
border when I talked to the people. In fact, one of the things that is 
actually disturbing is our committee staff has been refused access to 
even talk to the Department of Homeland Security personnel ever since 
we started making this particular kind of push.
  My assumption is there is a reason the drug cartels are trying to go 
through this Arizona sector. The reason relates to the kinds of lands 
that are down there and how we treat those lands. And the reason simply 
says, if we allow the Border Patrol to do their job, we will all be 
much more secure. And the concept of stopping the Border Patrol from 
doing their job on Federal property is simply unacceptable, and yet 
that is, indeed, what we are doing right now.
  To the Department of the Interior's response to that, they said the 
following in a memo in 2008:
  ``Congress has directed construction of these facilities''--meaning 
the public lands--``and there is a compelling national security issue, 
but these towers and buildings and associated equipment and motorized 
activities within congressionally designated wilderness would be 
contrary to protecting the primeval character of wilderness; and, 
hence, contrary to the intent of Congress.''
  Contrary to the intent of Congress? Do they really want us to believe 
that Congress wants to have a porous border? that Congress actually 
welcomes with open arms the drug cartels coming into this country? that 
the illegal drugs coming in here that are destroying the lives of our 
children we welcome with open arms? that the kind of human degradation, 
the kind of victim crimes, crimes against humanity, are something 
Congress really wants to perpetuate? That's really what they want us to 
believe?
  Further on in this memo:
  ``The Department of Homeland Security's proposals would not preserve 
natural conditions''--this is once again Interior's memo--``would make 
the imprint of man's work substantially noticeable, and would 
substantially reduce opportunities for solitude, or a primitive and 
unconfined type of recreation and would impair these areas for their 
future use and enjoyment of the American people as wilderness. The DHS 
proposals do not fall under the exemptions of the prohibitions for use 
in section 4(c) of the Wilderness Act and, therefore, are prohibited.''

[[Page 2400]]

  Reduce opportunities for solitude? Unconfined type of recreation? 
Maybe they do have a point. I'd say that the drug cartel operatives, 
armed with AK-47s, would pretty much reduce the solitude in a pretty 
serious way along the border. But, unfortunately, that is the approach; 
that is the attitude.
  So what does the Department of the Interior propose for this? Rather 
than allowing the Border Patrol to do their job and trying to control 
our border, which a sovereign country would naturally do, you put up a 
sign to tell Americans that travel is not recommended. The goal is to 
stay away from these particular areas. The approach was simply this: 
Since the areas of American land on the American border are unsafe, 
let's do whatever we can to stop Americans from going down there and, 
in so doing, cede over these areas to the drug cartels. That will be 
one of the ways of solving the problem.
  Since that's not a terribly, terribly politically correct approach, 
to warn the public of the danger of traveling through American 
territory, perhaps you can put up a softer and gentler sign, which is a 
travel caution: Smuggling and illegal immigration may be encountered in 
this area. Proceed at your own risk.
  I'm sorry. This may be the approach, but it's the wrong approach. And 
I wish this were just limited to the Arizona border. The same line was 
used in the Big Bend National Park, and it has been used on other lands 
around the border. We simply know it is not safe to go into these areas 
where criminal activity is taking place, and the problem is no one is 
doing anything about it.
  Almost all of the Organ Pipe National Monument was closed to 
visitors. That's along the Arizona border. Recently I saw an article in 
which a portion--a portion--of Organ Pipe was opened up to visitors. 
That's wonderful. However, if you went there, you still had to go with 
an armed guard. There's an article that was written only 8 hours ago 
talking about the opportunity of people going down there where the park 
ranger, wearing a bulky, dark green bulletproof vest, told the tourists 
last week that they would be going on their travel in a van and a hike. 
He told them that there would be some law enforcement officers hiding 
in the hills and closely watching their 2-hour nature hike, while 
another pair of armed rangers would follow the tourists closely from 
the ground. They'll all have M14s at hand, he said. Please don't be 
worried.

                              {time}  1820

  As the group loaded into the vans, one woman from Idaho whispered to 
her husband:

       Does it make you worried? They get chest protections, and 
     we don't get none of them.

  Homeland Security is saying that in this park, things are getting 
better. I think they are because finally they allowed Homeland Security 
to put up nine surveillance towers in the park, making it easier for 
the agents to detect new foot traffic so that drug-runners are no 
longer simply hiding in the hills waiting to succeed where the towers 
cannot contact them.
  You see, that's what we're doing, and that's simply not a viable 
approach to it.
  Let me try to tell you this way. Obviously, a fence by itself is not 
enough to secure the border. We do need electronic tracking devices. 
This is a picture of one of our mobile tracking devices. It's very high 
tech, it's very wonderful, and if you will notice, it's a truck with a 
traffic device on it.
  In the Organ Pipe National Monument, they tried to move this from 
point A to point B, and the end result was that after 6 months, the 
land managers finally said, okay, you can move this truck from point A 
to point B. By that time, it wasn't worth it. It's a truck. Now, if the 
land manager had studied this issue for 6 months and then said, all 
right, look, the land is too precious in that part where you want to 
go, you can't go at all, maybe I could understand that. I wouldn't like 
it, but I could understand it. But that's not what he said. He said, 
you're going to wait 6 months, I'll review it for 6 months, and 6 
months later he said, okay, go ahead and back up the truck and move it.
  These devices are essential for our controlling the border, but it is 
essential that if it is a mobile device, it has to be mobile. It has to 
have the ability to back up the truck and move it to somewhere else.
  There is another example of the pronghorn antelope that is there, the 
Sonoran pronghorn antelope, in the area. A BLM official wrote in an 
email to the Department of Homeland Security regarding testing for 
replacement of equipment that they could do the following: A biological 
monitor shall be present--a person--shall be present at the proposed 
location of these traffic monitors for the Sonoran pronghorn prior to 
any disturbance. The monitor must have experience with observing 
pronghorns. The monitor will scan the area for pronghorn, and, if 
observed, any kind of activity will be delayed until the pronghorn 
moves of its own volition. The pronghorn cannot be encouraged to vacate 
an area. And if by any chance the Border Patrol were to run across a 
group of these, its job was then to back up--not turn around--but to 
back up no faster than 15 miles an hour until you were out of that 
particular area.
  One of the things that we have found out that is taking place down 
there is basically the Department of the Interior is insisting on 
mitigation--I think there are some other words I would rather use--
mitigation funds coming from the Department of Homeland Security.
  The calculations we conducted a couple of years ago say that, as of 
that date, $10 million of Federal money has gone to the Border Patrol, 
supposedly to protect our border, and then instead been reverted over 
to the Department of the Interior to hire things like the pronghorn 
monitor or buy other property for other purposes in the name of 
mitigation of the environmental damage caused by the Border Patrol. 
Unfortunately, there is no way to mitigate against the environmental 
damage caused by the drug cartels and the human smugglers coming in 
here, nor does the Department of the Interior seem to care about that.
  I'm joined here by a good friend from Arizona who knows this full 
well. This is where he lives, and he understands it. He also sits on 
the committee that talks about these particular areas and has 
introduced an amendment to the reauthorization bill that comes from his 
committee. So the Representative, Mr. Quayle, I will yield to him what 
time he needs. If he would like to enter right now, and then I'll pick 
it up whenever you're done.
  Mr. QUAYLE. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I really want to 
thank him for his leadership on this issue and for working with me to 
put in similar provisions within the Homeland Security Reauthorization, 
which we hope will come to the floor in August because it's a serious 
issue. As the gentleman from Utah was talking about, the amount of 
destruction, both on the environmental side and just on the human side, 
from these drug smugglers and human smugglers in very environmentally 
sensitive areas in the Sonoran Desert is devastating.
  If you think about the amount of carnage that has happened just south 
of the border--you have over 30,000 people that have been killed by 
drug cartel violence in the last 5 years. Last year, I was with other 
members of our Arizona delegation. We were going down to the border and 
seeing what was going on, and we were at the Douglas point of entry. 
And the night before they had videos of this, which was about 70 yards 
from the border, where a fake police cruiser that was disguised by the 
drug cartels stopped just south of the port of entry, entered into an 
establishment, unloaded hundreds of rounds of ammunition in there, 
killing a handful and wounding dozens of people.
  Now these are the same types of people who are taking advantage of 
the weak spots within our border. If you look at Arizona specifically, 
the Arizona border, there are about 305 miles of Federal lands in 
Arizona. About 83 percent of the 370-mile Arizona-Mexico border is 
Federal lands.
  Right now, the Border Patrol agents do not have the ability to 
actually go onto those Federal lands unless they

[[Page 2401]]

abide by the Memorandum of Understanding, which says they have 
different definitions of when they can actually go and apprehend 
somebody. But the fact of the matter is that these drug cartels, these 
human smuggling operations, are nimble. They are watching every move 
that our Border Patrol agents are making. They are noting where the 
weak spots are and where the surveillance equipment is. And for our 
Border Patrolagents to actually go and move it to areas where the 
traffic has increased, they have to go to the Department of the 
Interior to get prior permission. There's a GAO study that said at one 
point in some instances that could take up to 4 months--4 months for 
our Border Patrol agents to actually move a piece of surveillance 
equipment or to move motorized vehicles onto various areas of Federal 
lands.
  Now, I understand the need to protect the delicate Sonoran Desert, 
but it is getting decimated--absolutely decimated--by these human 
traffickers and drug traffickers, who do not care about it. I 
personally believe that our Border Patrol agents and customs officials 
will do a much better job in actually being sensitive to these areas 
while trying to actually protect the citizens of this country from the 
violence that's going to be streaming across the border.
  This is such a big and serious issue that not that many people know 
about, and Mr. Bishop of Utah has really taken the lead on this, and I 
commend him for it. I look forward to working with you on these issues 
going forward because we need to get a handle on our border, and the 
violence is going to spill over. In order to do that, we have to allow 
our agents the ability to have the unfettered access to our Federal 
lands so they can actually do their job and protect the borders.
  Again, Mr. Bishop, thank you very much.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. I thank you for that, and I appreciate your 
joining me here because, once again, you live in that State, your 
constituents know the fear that is taking place, Americans who live on 
that particular border, the danger that is down there. And, once again, 
this is not just an issue that will go away if the economy goes sour. 
These are the drug cartels. These are the human traffickers. These are 
the worst kinds of people, and we don't want them here. And as a 
country, if we're going to be a sovereign country, we have to control 
the border, if for no other reason than we have to be able to control 
the border. Whether the total number coming across is getting less or 
is increasing--we don't have definite figures yet--it doesn't matter. 
As long as one drug cartel is still coming across the border with 
illegal drugs, that's one too many, and we have to do something about 
it.
  So I appreciate it very much, and I realize you have another 
obligation to go to. Thank you for coming down. You're welcome to stay 
if you would like to.
  But he also added a premise into where we're going, because what is 
taking place, quite frankly, is the violence that is taking place on 
the Arizona border. We all know about Fast and Furious and what a silly 
idea this was, how ludicrous a program to arm the drug cartel and to 
find out that those arms they were given by the Federal Government are 
coming back to harm us. But along the border, we have had a specific 
row of people who have been not just harassed by the drug cartel but 
have been killed by the drug cartel.
  Starting in 2002, Park Ranger Kris Eggle was shot and killed in the 
line of duty while pursuing a member of the Mexican drug cartel who had 
crossed the United States border into Organ Pipe National Monument, 
which is off limits to Americans. In 2008, Border Patrol Agent Luis 
Aguilar was killed in the line of duty after being hit by a vehicle 
that had crossed illegally into the United States through the Imperial 
Sand Dunes, which is BLM ground, where the Border Patrol has 
restrictions. What hurts me, as well, is Rob Krentz, a rancher, a 
multigenerational rancher, on his own property in Arizona.

                              {time}  1830

  See, Rob Krentz over there was actually out patrolling, going through 
his property. He had just had a hip replacement, was ready to have a 
knee replacement--or vice versa. He was on an ATV vehicle with his dog. 
He came across a group of illegals who were there--part of the cartel, 
again, is the assumption. Usually what happens is there is flight, but 
in this case there was no flight. He was not physically able to fly, 
and so what happened was both he and his dog were shot.
  The one we assume did the shooting came across that wildlife refuge 
where the gate was locked to prohibit the Border Patrol from going in 
there and doing their job. Then we assume his exit back into Mexico was 
a circuitous route that went back out of his way so he could go back 
through that same area that was off limits to the Border Patrol from 
totally doing their job. He lost his life because of our policies that 
don't make sense.
  December 10, 2010, Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was shot and 
killed--once again on Forest Service land--with guns that were obtained 
through the Fast and Furious program.
  One of the other committees of our Congress has on their Web site the 
statement that a now-sealed Federal grand jury indictment in the death 
of Border Patrol Agent Terry says the cartel operatives were patrolling 
this rugged desert area with the intent of intentionally and forcibly 
assaulting Border Patrol agents. And it happened because we are not 
taking control of our border.
  As sad as that is, this is still another look at the border. You know 
you're looking at the border because you can see the fence is still 
running along and the one road along the fence is still running along. 
Unfortunately, there's a gap in the fence. That gap is an endangered 
species habitat right-of-way so the species can go from one side of the 
border to the other. Unfortunately, I will tell you that it's not just 
an endangered species that goes from one side of the border to the 
other. That is endemic of the situation we have down there where our 
border policies, our land policies take precedence over border 
security. That is simply what we ought not or should not be doing.
  Our solution is, I think, very simple. It's House bill 1505, the 
National Security and Federal Lands Protection Act. The simple answer 
of what this bill does is simply it allows the Federal Border Patrol to 
do on Federal property what it already can do on private property. It 
says our number one priority should be controlling our borders for 
stopping the drugs and the violence that is taking place in Arizona. 
This bill protects legal use of the land--such as mining and hunting 
and camping and fishing--in an effort to try and make sure that we can 
protect American property for American use, not for drug cartel use.
  There were simpler versions of this that simply said you can't stop 
the Border Patrol from doing what they need to do to meet their needs. 
Unfortunately, some of the administration in these Departments laughed 
at us and said, That's not going to work. You can't tell us what won't 
happen. So we wrote the bill to be proactive and tell what the Border 
Patrol can do.
  It also had to put in there specific--and this is, once again, from 
the Department of the Interior insisting it--we put down the specific 
environmental laws that can be abridged only for the purpose of 
protecting the border. It is the same list that was done about 5 years 
ago when the Department of the Interior insisted that as Congress we 
had to list specific environmental laws that could be broached in order 
to complete some of the fencing along our southern border. Same rules, 
same laws, same element so the Border Patrol can do their job. That's 
what it simply does.
  There is one group that was opposed to it because they said the 
Border Patrol is found 15 to 20 miles north of the border. Yeah, their 
jurisdiction is up to 100 miles north of the border. They also said 
that surveillance status shows that there are nearly 8,000 miles--some 
estimate 20,000 miles--of illegal wildcat roads cutting through some of 
this border area. I want you to know it is not

[[Page 2402]]

the Border Patrol--even though this group tried to blame the Border 
Patrol for these 20,000--if indeed it's that high--miles of illegal 
roads. They're not the ones creating that. It is the drug cartels that 
are cutting roads through our habitat, through wilderness areas so that 
they can use them for their drug-smuggling activities.
  If you go down there, you can simply see on the ground where these 
trails are. If you fly above it, you can see where they are. If you go 
up to the high points, you can see where their nests are. So you can 
see very clearly and very easily where they have their lookout spots.
  Actually, I went to one of those. It was just over the border into 
Mexico. I was actually unimpressed because I found out that amongst the 
things they were leaving behind in the trash is they drank only Diet 
Coke. If they had done Dr. Pepper, I would have been impressed by their 
taste, but it was only Diet Coke.
  I have also heard all sorts of rumors about what we are trying to do 
with this bill, trying to make sure that this border is secure so 
Americans can go back into American property and be secure. I have 
heard rumors that we are trying to limit public access. That's not 
true. What we are trying do is make public access safe. That's the job 
of the government is to make our borders secure.
  I have been told that this is a simple land grab. Some groups out 
there who simply don't understand what's going on tried to label this 
as a giant land grab. I don't know how you can call it a land grab when 
the Federal Government is simply trying to allow the Border Patrol to 
do its job on Federal land. We're not expending any more power or 
opportunity to the Border Patrol. We're simply saying Federal land 
should not stop them from doing their job. There are some that will 
simply say, well, if we ignore this, it will simply go away. This 
problem is not going to go away. It is too deep; it is too severe to 
simply go way.
  There is one last reason why this approach is extremely important, 
and I'm saying this in conclusion. As I said in the beginning, almost 
every town hall meeting that I have they talk about immigration. 
Immigration issues are complex. Sometimes they are going to be 
complicated and will require compromise and consideration. Right now 
out there there's a great deal of anger and anxiety in a lot of people 
simply because we are not controlling our borders and American lands 
are not safe, and there is too much violence taking place. And it's 
simply wrong to prohibit our Border Patrol in favor of allowing the 
drug cartels and those doing human trafficking to have free access into 
this country.
  If indeed we are serious about long-term immigration, the first thing 
you have to do is reduce the anger and reduce the anxiety level. The 
first way to do that is to be able to look at the American people with 
a clear conscience and in truth, look them in the eye and say our 
borders are secure. We control who comes into this country and who does 
not come into this country because that is what a sovereign Nation 
does.
  Our hope is that we can pass this bill and take the first step to 
controlling the border, which is simply to allow the Border Patrol 
access to where the Border Patrol needs to be, to give them the same 
opportunity on public lands that they have on private lands. Because it 
is very clear, Border Patrol knows what they are doing. They are doing 
a good job.
  Where they are allowed the freedom and flexibility to do their jobs, 
the issue of illegal immigration and illegal entry into this country of 
all kinds, but especially illegal entry into this country by the bad 
guys who are trying to put illegal drugs and other kinds of crimes and 
bring them into this country, where they are allowed to do their job, 
they are successful.
  What we have to do is now look on Federal property where the Federal 
rules prohibit the Border Patrol from doing their job and change that, 
simply allow them to do their job. House bill 1505 does that. Until we 
do that, we will never move forward into a larger solution to our 
immigration problem. And we will continue to have illegal drugs and 
other kinds of crimes against humanity taking place on American soil, 
and it will not stop. That's why this bill is so important.
  With that, Mr. Speaker, with gratitude for allowing me this moment to 
go through this particular issue, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________