[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 4]
[House]
[Pages 4967-4970]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 RESTORING THE RULE OF LAW AND REESTABLISHING THE PILLARS OF AMERICAN 
                             EXCEPTIONALISM

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 3, 2013, the Chair recognizes the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. 
King) for 30 minutes.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
  As always, it's an honor to be recognized to address you here on the 
floor of the United States House of Representatives.
  I want to say to you, Mr. Speaker, that I come to this floor very 
troubled here this evening. I am troubled at the current inertia that 
seems to have been created in the minds and in the positions of a 
number of people who are here in the House and in the Senate, primarily 
those on my side of the aisle, who seemed to wake up on the morning of 
November 7 and decided that Mitt Romney would be President-elect if he 
just hadn't said two words, ``self-deport,'' and if he hadn't said two 
other words, ``47 percent.'' They had done this analysis, apparently, 
before there were any kind of exit polls that could have been 
considered.
  They persist in sticking with this opinion that something must be 
done about immigration in this country and that there needs to be 
comprehensive immigration reform passed and that, if that doesn't 
happen, then there's going to be a kind of calamity that might 
eliminate or badly weaken the bipartisan, two-party system that we have 
in this country.
  I reject those principles or those opinions, Mr. Speaker, because 
what I know about the facts refutes them completely. There are no facts 
that uphold such a position. It is true that the people in my party 
have lost a growing share of the vote of the list of minority 
coalitions that there are in the country. It's also true that the other 
party has demagogued this issue mercilessly, and the effect of their 
tens of millions of dollars has shown in the polls. My colleagues on my 
side of the aisle don't seem to recognize that. Perhaps they haven't 
thought this through, and I hope they do, Mr. Speaker. But the most 
essential pillar of American exceptionalism that is affected by this 
debate over immigration is the rule of law.
  It appears to me that there are a number of people on my side of the 
aisle who say--even though they recognize that the comprehensive 
immigration reform agenda, which has been around since the George W. 
Bush administration and perhaps before--they believe that somehow, even 
though it's

[[Page 4968]]

fifth or sixth on the list of issues that would be important and 
relevant to minorities that look at the path to citizenship and at a 
path to staying in the United States and working and raising their 
families and being productive here, that jobs and the economy are more 
important. A whole list of things are more important, but it's fifth or 
sixth on that priority list. Those who advocate for this Gang of 
Eight's version, which seems to be emerging from the Senate in 
comprehensive immigration reform, seem to think that we should do 
something, that we should pass some type of amnesty because that's 
what's required to ``start the conversation.''
  I took an oath to uphold this Constitution. This Constitution is the 
supreme law of the land, and the rule of law is an essential pillar of 
American exceptionalism; and if there are people in this Congress, 
House or Senate, who are prepared to sacrifice the rule of law in order 
to start a conversation, that's enough to get me to come here to the 
floor tonight, Mr. Speaker, to start the conversation about restoring 
the rule of law and reestablishing the pillars of American 
exceptionalism and making sure that this great Nation that we are can 
go on to our destiny beyond the shining city on the hill to a place 
that actually does realize American destiny with all of the pillars of 
American exceptionalism intact, not sacrificing the rule of law for 
political expediency, which is the bargain that is being negotiated 
over on the Senate side and behind closed doors here on the House side, 
although not even publicly admitted to.
  So, Mr. Speaker, in the earlier part of this discussion, I would be 
very pleased to yield to a very strong leader on the rule of law, to 
one who has led within his own community in Hazleton and who has been a 
clear and articulate voice on protecting and defending America's rule 
of law destiny, and that's the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. 
Barletta).
  Mr. BARLETTA. Thank you, Congressman King.
  Recently, there has been a lot of talk in Washington about illegal 
immigration. As the mayor of Hazleton, Pennsylvania, after it was 
estimated that 10 percent of our entire population was there illegally, 
I created the first law of its kind in the country. Now, I don't need 
to be briefed about illegal immigration--I have lived it. Because 
Washington has failed to protect our borders, cities like mine have 
been overcome. I had to deal with it myself because of Washington's 
failure.
  Our immigration laws were created for two reasons: one, to protect 
the American people and our national security; and two, to protect 
American workers.
  Now, in 1986, Ronald Reagan had promised the American people that if 
we'd give amnesty to 1.5 million illegal aliens that we would secure 
our borders and that this would never happen again. After the 
declaration of amnesty, that 1.5 million actually doubled to over 3 
million. Now, a quarter of a century later, over 11 million people are 
in our country illegally, and our borders are still not secured.
  This isn't just about the southern border. There is a lot of focus 
about, if we secure the southern border, our borders are secure. Forty 
percent of the people who are in the country illegally did not cross a 
border--they didn't cross the southern border; they didn't come across 
Canada. Forty percent of the people who are in the country illegally 
came on visas and overstayed their visas. In fact, one of the men who 
was granted amnesty in 1986 was involved in the 1993 attack on the 
World Trade Center. Now, my city is 2,000 miles away from the nearest 
southern border, and I have an illegal immigration problem. Any State 
that has an international airport is a border State.

                              {time}  1820

  There are 22 million Americans who are out of work. We should not be 
encouraging millions more to come here illegally when so many Americans 
cannot find jobs. Medicare and Social Security are going broke, and yet 
the Heritage Foundation did a study that said that if we give a pathway 
to citizenship to the 11 million or more who are here, it will cost 
over $2.6 trillion over the next 20 years. We should not even be 
talking about offering amnesty. There should be no bill that talks 
about a pathway to citizenship. We should be securing our borders 
first.
  This is something that we should all be able to agree upon, Democrats 
and Republicans, the Senate and the House, if we are sincere, if we're 
not trying to fool the American people a second time. We promised them 
that we would secure our borders before we give amnesty. Offering a 
pathway to citizenship will make matters worse. It will encourage 
millions more to come here illegally.
  You know, you don't replace your carpet at home when you still have a 
hole in the roof.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania for coming 
to the floor to deliver this presentation, this hands-on presentation 
from the gentleman, Mr. Barletta. If you would yield to a question, I'm 
curious as to the percentage of the population of Hazleton that is a 
minority population, perhaps Hispanic population, and how your election 
results turned out the last time you ran for mayor of Hazleton?
  Mr. BARLETTA. Sure. When I was mayor of Hazleton, over 40 percent of 
the entire population of Hazleton was Hispanic, and I won with over 90 
percent of the vote. And I don't know of anyone at the time who took a 
harder stance against illegal immigration than I had at that time. So 
this talk that you cannot stand up for the rule of law, that you cannot 
stand up against illegal immigration and still welcome new immigrants, 
new American citizens, is totally false.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Reclaiming my time, just doing a quick calculation 
off of that, 40 percent of the population of Hazleton being Hispanic, 
presuming that represented a percentage of the voting population that 
was Hispanic, and you carried 90 percent of the vote, which would 
indicate that somewhere in the area of 75 percent of the Hispanic 
population voted for Lou Barletta for mayor of Hazleton; would that be 
close to correct?
  Mr. BARLETTA. I believe it would. And again, what I found in my 
hands-on experience as a mayor in dealing with the problem of illegal 
immigration, plus a city whose Hispanic population had exploded, for 
example, to show you how fast our population had grown, in the year 
2000, English as a Second Language, the budget for English as a Second 
Language was $500. Just 5 years later, it was $1.5 million. So as our 
immigrant population grew, we also realized that the most important 
issues to those that were there were good opportunities, were good 
jobs. It wasn't about granting amnesty or a pathway to citizenship. 
They wanted good jobs and a good education for their children. They 
came to America for that better life. Offering amnesty wasn't going to 
make their life any better, and they understood that. They also 
understand that allowing 20 or 30 million more people to come into this 
country illegally is not helpful for people who are starting out, who 
need the jobs that they came here for, or many Americans who can't find 
work.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. I'm curious, since you came to Congress here, Mr. 
Barletta, and I'm going to presuppose that you have strong personal 
relationships among the entire spectrum of the community of Hazleton, 
have any of them in any appreciable number changed their position on 
the immigration issue since they sent you to Congress? And can you 
speak on some of your relationships with your constituents today and 
those who were your constituents when you were mayor?
  Mr. BARLETTA. The position has not changed. And, in fact, I believe 
the fact that I stood up for the rule of law and I speak for the 
importance of protecting our national security and our American jobs 
here, it has allowed me to win elections, getting both Democrat and 
Republican support. I ran in a district that was 2:1 Democrat, and I 
won by over 10 percent of the vote. I really believe the fact that I 
was able to stand up when Washington had let us down was really the 
reason why Democrats, Republicans, immigrants, and non-immigrants 
supported me.

[[Page 4969]]


  Mr. KING of Iowa. Reclaiming my time, the individuals that come here 
to this Congress from various districts, and surely there are many that 
come from blue collar-type districts--I'm going to presume that's a 
fair amount of the Democrat constituency that you represent, me being a 
blue collar kind of a guy and a hands-on fellow--I started out as an 
earth-moving contractor, actually in the labor part of the construction 
business--how do you suppose the constituents of other Members of 
Congress that don't have this same position that you have on the rule 
of law and immigration and protecting legal immigrants, what are they 
hearing do you suppose in those similar districts to the one you have?
  Mr. BARLETTA. I believe that people all over the country understand 
what I'm saying, that illegal immigration is crushing our cities. Our 
population in Hazleton grew by 50 percent, but our tax revenue remained 
the same. Our population grew by 50 percent, but our tax revenue 
remained the same. Small cities, small towns like Hazleton, 
Pennsylvania, are crushed by the burden of illegal immigration.
  I was sued for creating the first law of its kind in the country, and 
I couldn't find politicians to come near me, to be honest with you. It 
was pretty refreshing because nobody came to Hazleton. And I thought I 
was standing there alone until I started getting cards and letters and 
checks from people all over the United States. In fact, I got checks 
from every State, including Alaska and Hawaii, to help defend our city 
in that lawsuit. We raised over half a million dollars, most of it in 
$10 and $20 donations, from people all over America who felt the same 
way. I am not alone. The American people understand what illegal 
immigration means. It doesn't mean that we roll up the welcome mat to 
new immigrants. We ask them to come here through the proper channels, 
respect the rule of law, and then give them the opportunity that they 
came to America for.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Reclaiming my time, I remain curious to the wealth 
of experience that the former mayor and the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
has provided here, Mr. Speaker. I would ask also, of the illegal drug 
distribution links that exist in this country and that which I'm going 
to presume also shows up in Hazleton, illegal drugs and violence, and I 
will make this statement into the Record, Mr. Speaker, and that is, in 
my meetings with the Drug Enforcement Agency and a number of others 
that are involved in enforcing the laws against illegal drugs, they 
tell me that at least one link in every illegal drug distribution chain 
in America, at least one link in that chain, is carried out by someone 
who is unlawfully present in the United States. The cost of those 
illegal drugs to our society, I don't know has been quantified. That 
trade itself has been estimated to be something above $40 billion, 
perhaps something above $60 billion a year, and I would ask the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania if his experience would reflect that to be 
true?
  Mr. BARLETTA. Well, it is absolutely true. I'll give you an example. 
We had arrested a young man for selling cocaine on a playground. The 
man was in the country illegally. It took our detectives 5 hours to 
determine who he was. He had five Social Security cards. He had five 
identities. Law enforcement has no idea who they are dealing with; 
many, many are here under fraudulent documentation. Those who are 
involved in the criminal element, in the gangs or drug trade, I don't 
believe will be coming forward no matter what laws we pass here. And we 
can pass all the laws in the world; if we don't enforce the laws of 
this country and if we don't allow States and local law enforcement to 
work in harmony with the Federal Government, we will never stop the 
problem of illegal immigration. But what we shouldn't do is make the 
same mistake we made in 1986 and give a green light to people all over 
the world to come here illegally while our borders are still open.

                              {time}  1830

  If you were a family waiting to come to the United States because you 
wanted to obey the law, but you hear a declaration like we're hearing 
here in Washington, offering a pathway to citizenship and protection 
while you're here, why would you wait? Why would you wait with your 
family?
  It would be a green light for people to come. That's why the problem 
will become worse.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. And reclaiming my time, it was reported to me today 
here on the floor, a Representative that represents an area very near 
the southern border said to me that the illegal border crossings are up 
20 percent since the dialog on comprehensive immigration reform, that 
euphemism began.
  So the encouragement for people to get into the United States on the 
chance that this Congress will pass some kind of an act that would 
ultimately be amnesty is bringing more people into the United States.
  But I wanted to circle back and ask another question of the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania, and that is that there's a GAO study, a General 
Accountability Office study, of about 2 years ago that went back 
through our prison system and asked the question, a number of questions 
about the population of our prison system that are criminal aliens. And 
that number was at least 28 percent. Some numbers show 30, depending on 
how you define that.
  But there also was a number in there that was stark to me. The people 
in prisons in the United States, both Federal and State, all together, 
who have been convicted of homicide, now that prison population, 
according to that study, was 25,064. And when I think of a number that 
large, multiples of all of our casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan, that 
is American population, most of it, that's a number, but it's human. 
It's very, very personal.
  And I would ask the gentleman from Pennsylvania if he would have any 
personal accounts that might reflect a component of that 25,064.
  Mr. BARLETTA. Well I did, actually. The final straw for me that made 
me realize that I needed to do something to protect the people in my 
town actually happened on May 10, 2006. It was a day that I'll never 
forget.
  Earlier in the day we had arrested a 14-year-old for shooting a gun 
into a crowded playground. The 14-year-old was in the country 
illegally. And it was interesting: he had his lawyer on speed dial on 
his cell phone, which I thought I don't know how many 14-year-olds 
carry their lawyer on a speed dial.
  I remember going home that day and telling my wife that I had--I 
didn't know what to do anymore. We were losing control of the city. We 
didn't have the resources to deal with the problem.
  That same night I got a call from the chief of police, 1 o'clock in 
the morning, a 29-year-old city man, father of three children, was shot 
in the head. He was shot by one of the gang members in the city.
  That one homicide, it took our police department 36 hours to bring 
the people forward that committed that crime. We spent half of our 
yearly budget in overtime in the police department on that one murder.
  And enough was enough. If the Federal Government wasn't going to do 
anything, then I had to. I took an oath, and I had an obligation to do 
so. And that's what began my crusade.
  I was sued, by the way. I was sued for creating the law. In fact, the 
plaintiffs that sued the city of Hazelton, many of the plaintiffs were 
admitted illegal aliens who sued the city. They had their identities 
kept confidential. They had asked if their identities could be kept 
confidential, which they were. We were not allowed to ask their names.
  They then asked if they could be excused from showing up at the trial 
because they were in the country illegally and didn't want to go to a 
Federal courthouse. It was granted.
  I never saw our accusers. I took the stand for 2 days. I testified 
for 2 days, but never saw the people that sued the city of Hazelton. I 
felt that illegal aliens were given more rights than a United States 
citizen would be given. You cannot sue your city and remain anonymous.
  I vowed to appeal this and fight this to the Supreme Court, which we 
did.

[[Page 4970]]

  So what brings me here is a life of experience as a mayor who tries 
to balance a budget, provide a good quality of life for the people that 
live there, and realize what happens when illegal immigration, not at 
the border, not just at the border, not just in Texas. I'm 2,000 miles 
away from that southern border.
  We have good reason to enforce our immigration laws, and we should 
not be encouraging people to come to this country illegally by granting 
amnesty. We did it in 1986, and we're talking about this again.
  Why obey our immigration laws if we have an administration that won't 
enforce the laws and a Congress that wants to give amnesty every time 
the problem comes up again?
  We need to enforce our laws. We need to make E-verify mandatory. 
Protect American jobs. We need to make sure we're protecting our 
national security. There are people around the world that want to harm 
us.
  And we need to give the immigrants that come here the opportunity 
that they waited for, those immigrants that stood and waited because 
they wanted to obey America's laws and they are here, and we are 
stealing that opportunity away from them. Yet we're telling them we're 
doing this for the immigrants that are here.
  They're smarter than that. And that's why immigration is not the most 
important issue to the people that are here. They want that education; 
let's give it to them.
  All the programs that the Heritage Foundation talks about that will 
be impacted by this pathway to citizenship are programs that the most 
needy need to live. Why are we going to hurt people that need these 
programs?
  I feel very strongly about this issue. I feel very strongly, and 
that's why I'm here to speak up.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Reclaiming my time, I very much thank the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania for coming to the floor and voicing his opinion. And 
I know that he's also occupied with a very tight schedule, so I 
appreciate that a great deal.
  Mr. Speaker, the attention that I've given Mr. Barletta, I hope that 
you and America have given Lou Barletta as well. And I hope that he's 
rewarded, not only by his constituents, but by a policy of protection 
of the rule of law that can be re-established here in this country.
  The idea that we should somehow suspend our good judgment, and we 
should waive the rule of law, all for some idea of political 
expediency, is not compatible with the principles of our political 
party. And sacrificing the rule of law for political expediency seems, 
to me, to be a foolish idea.
  It needs to be precious to be an American citizen. Citizenship should 
be valuable. And throughout all of the years that people have come into 
the United States legally--and the distinction between legal and 
illegal has been conflated by the open-borders crowd, both Republicans 
and Democrats.
  But you'll watch, Mr. Speaker, how they conflate the language. A few 
years ago they started blending the term ``health care'' and ``health 
insurance'' till it became one thing, and we got ObamaCare out of that, 
because people could no longer draw the distinction between health care 
and health insurance.
  And we've also watched during a similar period of time, as the dialog 
of the distinction between illegal immigrant and immigrant, the 
distinction--immigrant means someone who came to the United States 
legally and followed our laws, that saw the image of the Statue of 
Liberty, was inspired by that image, and found a way to come to America 
to exercise all the God-given liberties that are here, that were 
defined so well in our Declaration of Independence and protected in our 
Constitution. That's ``immigrant.''
  That's where the vigor comes from, for the American population and 
civilization, among our brothers. It's God-given liberty, but it's also 
the vigor of those who were inspired to come to America.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I recognize there are only about 3 minutes left, but 
I'd be very happy to yield to the gentleman from Texas, who is very 
reliable and a very clear voice, as much time as there may remain.
  Mr. GOHMERT. Well, thank you. And I'll just take a moment because 
what you're talking about is so very critical.
  And just to reiterate the point that's been coming out in a couple of 
hearings, I was shocked that 34.9 percent of all prosecutions by this 
administration were not for drugs; they were for people reentering this 
country after they've been deported.

                              {time}  1840

  They're prosecuting people for illegal entries. You don't even 
prosecute--this administration--people that just come across one time. 
And when you think about all the detention, all the prison, the jail 
space, the prosecutors. We pay for the defense attorneys. You think 
about all of the prisons around America which contain so many people 
who came in illegally, when this administration says it cannot afford 
to secure the border, then they have not taken stock of how much money 
that this country is having to spend on prisons, prosecutors, jails, 
defense attorneys, all of the costs that come with that, because 
they're not doing their job.
  And I know it goes back to the Bush administration. That is not a 
defense. And they need to take care of their job--and I hope and pray 
they will--instead of using the issue of a secure border as ransom. No, 
we will only secure the border if you will give us amnesty so people 
can vote for Democrats. That is outrageous. And Jay Leno had it right.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Reclaiming my time and thanking the gentleman from 
Texas, I add up those numbers and it looks like a number approaching 60 
percent of the resources used by the Federal Government to prosecute 
have to do with something coming cross the border, whether it's people, 
or it's 90 percent of the illegal drugs consumed in America is the 
other component of that presentation. So if we control this border, Mr. 
Speaker, we can control the 34.9 percent of the prosecutions about 
reentry. We have roughly a quarter of that prosecution that has to do 
with illegal drugs. And the Drug Enforcement Agency does tell us that 
between 80 and 90 percent of the illegal drugs consumed in America come 
from or through Mexico.
  If there's a universal position on this side of the aisle, Mr. 
Speaker, it has to do with secure the border, prove you secured the 
border, establish that, reestablish respect for the rule of law. At 
that point, we can have a conversation about some of the ideas that are 
emerging over on the Senate side and in the secret meetings here in the 
House of Representatives.
  With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________