the chair: on this vote the yeas are 192, the nays are 222, the amendment is not adopted. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from ohio, mr. kucinich, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redisdest nate the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. kucinich of ohio. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote the yeas are --

the chair: on this vote the yeas are 136. the nays are 281 and the amendment is not adoipted. the unfinished business is a question for a recorded vote on amendment number 9 printed in the congressional record offered by the gentleman from texas, mr. burgess, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 9 pribted in the congressional record offered by mr. -- printed in the congressional record offered by mr. burgess of texas. the chair: a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote the yeas are 168. nates are 249. the amendment is not adopted. the unfinished business is a request for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new york, mr. reed, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. reed of new york. the chair: a recorded vote has

been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote the yeas are 223. the nays are 195 and the amendment is adopted. the unfinished business is a request of a recorded vote on the amendment offered by ms. loretta sanchez, on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. ms. loretta sanchez of california. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of

representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote -- the chair: on this vote the yeas are 182 and the nays are 237 and the amendment is not adopted. the unfinished is request for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by mr. polis on which

the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. polis of colorado. the chair: a request for a recorded vote has been requested. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote --

the chair: the yeas are 138 and the nays are 281. the ungin finished is business request for a recorded vote on which further proceedings and which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. lujan of new mexico. the chair: those in support of a recorded vote will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote, the yeas are 174 and the nays are 244 and the amendment is not adopted. the committee will be in order. the chair: the committee will be in order. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia rise? >> i rise and request to speak out of order. the chair: without objection. the gentleman is recognized. mr. cantor: i would advise the house that at the end of the amendment series is the lummis

amendment. after that amendment, we will be revoting the connelly amendment. so don't leave. we will need to be revoting the gentleman's amendment. i ask unanimous consent that roll call number 327 be vacated to the end that the request for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from virginia, mr. connolly remain as unfinished business and further the chair may reduce the time for voting on that amendment to not less than two minutes. the chair: is there objection? without objection, so ordered. the chair appreciates the motion and will state that the chair didn't recognize individuals in the well. two-minute voting will proceed. pursuant to clause 6, rule 18, proceedings will continue in the following order. an amendment by mr. chabot of

ohio, amendment by blsblurning of tennessee. amendment by mr. flake of arizona, amendment by mr. king of iowa and amendment by mrs. lummis of wyominging. the chair will reduce the time for all electronic votes. the request for an amendment offered by the gentleman from ohio, on which further proceedings were postponed and the knows prevailed. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. chabot of ohio. the chair: a recorded vote has been request dollars. those in support of the request will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: the yeas are 141 and the nays are 276 and the amendment is not adopted. unfinished business is request for a recorded vote offered by the gentlewoman from tennessee, mrs. blackburn on which further proceedings were postponed. the clerk: second amendment offered by mrs. blackburn of tennessee. the speaker pro tempore: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of a recorded vote will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. by electric this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly

prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote the yeas are 157. the nays are 261. the amendment is not adopted. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by mr. mulvaney, on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: an amendment offered by mr. mulvaney of south carolina. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote the yeas are 125 and the nays is 293 and the amendment is not

adopted. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona, mr. flake, on which the yeas prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: first vote offered by mr. flake of arizona. the chair: those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote the yeas are --

the chair: on this vote the yeas are 144 and the nays are 274 and the amendment is not adopted. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from iowa, mr. king, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. king of iowa. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote the yeas are 184 and the nays are 235 and the amendment is not adopted. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from wyoming, mrs.

lummis. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: an amendment offered by mrs. lummis of wyoming. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote the yeas are 114 and the nays are 302 and the amendment is not adopted. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote offered by the gentleman from virginia, mr. connolly, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the yice prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. -- which the yice prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: an amendment offered by mr. connolly of virginia. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. leong. -- members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: the yeas are 208 and nays are 207. with one present. amendment is adopted. the clerk will read. the clerk: this act may be cited as the energy and water development and related agencies appropriations act, 2013. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey rise? the gentleman will suspend. the committee will be in order. mr. frelinghuysen: i move that the committee do now rise and report the bill back to the house with sundry amendments

with the recommendation that the amendments be agreed to and the bill be amended to pass. the chair: the question is on the motion that the committee rise. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the motion passes. accordingly, the committee rises.

the chair: the committee of the whole house under the state of the union having had under consideration reports the same back to the house with sundry amendments with a recommendation that the amendments be agreed to and the bill as amended do pass. the speaker pro tempore: the chairman of the committee of the

whole house on the state of the union reports that the committee has had under consideration h.r. 5325 and reports the bill back to the house with sundry amendments adopted in the committee of the whole with the recommendation that the amendments be adopted and the bill as amended do pass. the previous question is ordered. is a separate vote demanded on any amendment reported from the committee of the whole? if not, the chair will put them engross. the question is on the adoption of the amendment. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the yeas have it and the amendments are adopted. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the yeas have it. third reading. the clerk: a bill making appropriations for energy, and water development agencies for fiscal year september 30, 2013 and for other purposes. >> mr. speaker --

the speaker pro tempore: the house will come to order. for what purpose does the gentleman from iowa rise? mr. boswell: i have a motion to recommit at the desk. the speaker pro tempore: is the gentleman opposed to the bill? mr. boswell: i am. the chair: the clerk will report the motion. the clerk: mr. boswell of iowa moves to commit the bill h.r. 5325 to the committee on appropriations with stuckses to report the same back to the house forthwith, page 6, line 18, increase by $31,600,000 -- mr. boswell: mr. speaker, dispense with the reading. the speaker pro tempore: is there objection? the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. boswell: thank you, mr.

speaker. i want to say at the onset this again is perhaps the final amendment to the bill. it will not kill the bill. pass it and send it back to the committee. if not, the bill will immediately proceed to final passage. >> the house is not in order. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is correct. the gentleman from iowa will suspend. the chair would ask members to please take their seats and remove conversations from the aisle.

the gentleman from iowa. mr. boswell: thank you. again, it will not kill the bill or send it back to committee. if adopted, the bill would immediately proceed to final passage as amended. what this amendment will do provide increased resources for disaster flood protection as well $1 million in targeted resources towards nonmilitary cooperation assistance with our closest alley in the middle east and one of the closest allies we have, israel. i have noticed and i have said before and i think will's say it again, for more than a year i have waited patiently for the majority to stop the slash and burn legislation and revitalize the nation and empower employers to create jobs. well, we are still waiting on those millionaire job creators to show us the jobs and waiting for the majority to pass an actual jobs bill. while we sit here and wait, mother nature does not. mother nature did not wait for the majority to pass the bill to send massive amounts of snow and rain to parts of montana triggering the missouri river flood of 2011, leaving homes, businesses, farms and towns devastated. mother nature did not wait for the majority to pass a jobs bill

to send hurricane irene barrelling across the eastern seaboard causing millions in damage. the additional $31 million in funding for planning, training and other measures would ensure the readiness of the corps of engineers to respond to floods, hurricanes and other natural disasters and to support emergency operations in response to such disasters, including, but not limited to advanced majors and emergency operations. these additional resources may not seem significant to some people but to the family farm that is saved because of adequate farm protection relief or small business or to the family home saved or the communities that are saved, these additional resources are not only significant, they can mean the difference between living the dream or living in december lation. these additional resources are

only one reason you should support this amendment. one other reason is that in supporting this amendment, you vote to support greater cooperation efforts on energy efficiency and renewable energy with israel. israel is our strongest ally in the middle east, without question. and one of our strongest allies across the globe and the ability to advance the interests of both is crucial. one area where i believe we can work even closer to together is energy efficiency and renewable energy. coming from our state of iowa, i know a little bit about renewable energy. i was a national leader in the production of wind power, biodiesel, ethanol and we take great pride in our ability to advance technology to lead to sleener, more sustainable energy production. in order to reduce our reliance on foreign oil, we must take all

of the above approach on energy, including production of fossil fuels and yes, renewable, green sources of energy in cooperation with our ally israel. we can advance the energy securities of both our nations. so therefore, i urge, all my colleagues to vote yes. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does seek recognition? mr. frelinghuysen: i rise in opposition to the motion to recommit. let me reassure my colleagues i share a concern for fixing the infrastructure that was damaged last year. we committed $1.7 billion to the corps of engineers last year for that very purpose. the bill before us now already funds the flood control and coastal emergency of the president's request of $30

million. in addition, the motion would increase funding for the u.s.-israeli agreement to 50% of last year's level. this is completely unwarranted. in is a completely unwarranted increase since our bill already maintains funding for this very important program at last year's level even while we have cut so many programs within our bill to stay within the budget. mr. chairman, we put together a strong bipartisan bill which supports a comprehensive energy policy. it maintains a strong national defense and it maintains the fact that we keep america competitive and keep america open for business. in that regard, mr. chairman. in case there is any question, if members care about the harbor maintenance trust fund projects, this bill is your best option. $158 million above the president's request and $120

million above the senate. if you want funding levels for these important projects, you must vote for our bill. mr. speaker, our bill is a commitment to national security, reducing spending and keeping america open for business. i urge members to vote against the motion to recommit and vote for final passage of the bill. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the previous question is ordered on the motion to recommit. the question is on the motion to recommit. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. mr. boswell: request a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: a recorded vote is requested. those favoring a recorded vote will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is

ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule 20 this 15-minute vote will be followed by five-minute votes on final passage of the bill and motion to instruct conferees on h.r. 3438 offered by mr. flake and mr. doggett. this will be a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

6:15. 6:15.

the speaker pro tempore: the yeas are 185 and the nays are 233. the motion is not adopted. the question is on passage of

the bill under clause 10 of rule 20. the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

ifment on this vote, the yeas are 255 and nays are 165 and without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. the unfinished business is the vote on the motion to instruct on h.r. 4348 offered by the gentleman from arizona, mr. flake, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. the clerk will redesignate the motion. the clerk: motion to instruct conferees on h.r. 4348 offered

by mr. flake of arizona. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to instruct. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 259, the nays are 154. the motion is not adopted.

sorry, the motion is adopted. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the unfinished business is the vote on the motion of instruct on h.r. 4348 offered by the gentleman from texas, mr. doggett, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. the clerk will redesignate the motion. the clerk: motion to instruct conferees on h.r. 4348 offer by mr. doggett of texas. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to instruct. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 192, the nays are 226. the motion is not adopted. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina rise? i send to the desk a privileged report from the committee on rules for filing under the rule. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will read the title. the report on the title. the clerk: report to accompany house resolution 679, resolution providing for consideration of the bill h.l. 43836, to amend -- h.r. 436, to repeal the excise tax on medical devices and providing for consideration of the bill h.r. 5882, making appropriations for the legislative branch for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2013, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: referred to the house calendar and ordered printed. pursuant to house resolution 667 and rule 18, the chair declares the house in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for the further consideration of h.r. 5855.

will the gentleman from florida, mr. west, kindly take the chair? mr. west: -- whoip the house is in the committee of the -- the chair: the house is in the committee of the whole house on the state of the yue union for the further consideration of h.r. 5855 which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: a bill making appropriations for the department of homeland security for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2013, and for other purposes. the chair: when the committee of the whole house rose earlier today, all time for general debate had expired. pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. during consideration of the bill for amendment, the chair may accord priority and recognition to a member offering an amendment who has caused it to be printed in the designated

place in the congressional record. those amendments will be considered read. the clerk will read. the clerk: be it enacted the following sums are appropriated for the department of homeland security for the fiscal year 2013 namely. title 1, departmental management and operations, departmental operations, office of the secretary and executive management, $121,850,000. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? mr. flake: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment.

the chair: will the gentleman please state his amendment to the desk? -- take his amendment to the desk? the clerk: amendment offered by mr. flake of arizona, page 2, line 17, after the dollar amount insert, reduce by $50,000. page 7, line 13, after the dollar amount insert, increase by $43,000. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. flake: i thank the chair. this amendment is straightforward. it would reduce funding for the office of the secretary by $50,000 and transfer a revenue-neutral amount to the u.s. customs and border protection salaries and expenses. this is a cut from the secretary's nearly $122 million

in funding. again only slightly more than the committee provided for the secretary to spend on receptions this year. i offer this amendment in a means to bring up an important issue. both to congress and to the secretary's attention. let me start by thanking the chairman and the ranking member for their attention to border issues in this bill. as well as the staff assist ants in bringing this bill to the floor. in the report accompanying last year's homeland security appropriation bill, the committee directed the department to provide a, quote, resource allocation and staffing model for ports of entry. it would appear to be the trend with congressional requests for information, answers to these questions or budget documentation were never provided. the department either failed to

prioritize or simply ignored the request. the committee report notes, quote, as the committee has not yet received the c.b.p. work load staffing allocation model, the committee cannot assess c.b.p.'s identified needs. as we're no doubt aware, funding for border security efforts between the port of entry has received or has increased exponentially over recent years and justifiably so. but while the budget for border patrol -- but the -- i'm sorry, the budget for customs and border patrol officers at the ports has not kept pace. when i travel in the border region, there are often concerns raised at that point that there's insufficient staffing at the ports. these -- those serving at the ports of entry had a dual role. they have to facilitate commerce across the border and to prevent unauthorized people from crossing the border. i could talk at length about the benefits of cross-border trade for communities along the border, but let me just cite a couple of examples. focusing on the southern border, mexico is the third largest trading partner and second largest u.s. market with six

million jobs depending on the trade with mexico. it was recently quoted saying, quote, arizona's border is the gateway for some $26 billion worth of imports and exports for some 44 million people each year. a recent release cited the legal -- that legal mexican visitors spend roughly $7.3 million a day in arizona and arizona businesses export nearly $6 billion in goods in 2011. so there are benefits all over for trade of this type. the mar posea port of entry is one of the largest ports of entry for food and vedge -- fruit and vegetables in the u.s. in 2011 the u.s. imported $13 -- 13.4 billion pounds of fresh produce grown in mexico and more than 1/3 of that entered there. let me summarize the rest. we simply have to have better staffing at these ports and the department has been asked to provide us with their needs and they simply won't. we simply haven't been able to

get that information. . i'm the last member on the appropriations committee that would support writing a blank check to any department. but we have got to make sure that these needs are met and that's why this amendment is critical. and i'm grateful to the chairman and ranking member for working with me on it. and i reserve. the chair: the gentleman may not reserve. mr. flake: i yield back. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from alabama seek recognition? mr. aderholt: strike the last word. i rise in support of the gentleman's amendment. the secretary has felt critical reports necessary for this committee's oversight and therefore we do accept the gentleman from arizona's amendment. yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time.

the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from wisconsin rise? ms. moore: mr. chairman, i have an amendment and seek recognition at this time. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by ms. moore of wisconsin. insert increase by $3 million. page 9, line 7, after the dollar amount insert reduced by $4, 8,000,000. ms. moore: the purpose of my amendment is to restore $3

million to the department of homeland security office of civil rights and liberties. this amendment would simply level funds this account at the fiscal year to 2012 levels. mr. chairman, it troubles me to see the continued rollout of communities and increasing funding for these 287-g programs in the underlying bill, especially with the 13% decrease in funding for the office of civil rights and liberties. experts and officials across the country have concern about these programs that shift federal immigration laws into the hands of local police. mr. chair, i ask unanimous consent to insert a letter into the record from 88 civil rights organizations urging the federal bureau of investigation to, quote, end the facilitation of a

fundamentally flawed program, unquote. the chair: the request will be covered by general leave. ms. moore: the letter states quote, this has caused widespread controversy because it threatens public safety, encourages racial profiling, undermines community policing and serves as a deportation dragnet into anyone who is booked into police custody. as co-chair of the women's caucus, i'm particularly concerned when i hear stories of the effect of this program that they have on victims across our communities. women and their children are increasingly afraid to go to local police to get confidential help to call 9-1-1-during an emergency because they are terrified of being caught in this dragnet. for them, it is better to suffer

than their families being torn apart. these are real people but they cannot come forward. according an october, 2011 report by the umple c. berkley university warrant institute, more than one-third of individuals arrested in this program report that they have a u.s. citizen spouse or child. in other words, an estimated 88,000 families with u.s. citizens have been impacted by secure communities. the same report found that latinos comprise 93% of the individuals arrested in this program despite only comprising 77% of the population. mr. chairman, i suggest that is not the america we want to create. we should all be able to agree that we don't want to see an america where victims are afraid

of the police or an america where racial profiling is encouraged or tolerated. now, i understand, mr. chairman, that some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle believe that increasing enforcement policies is the right approach to solve our broken immigration system. with that being said, i appeal to my colleagues to support efforts by the department of homeland security to ensure adequate oversight of this program. the office of civil rights and liberties have taken and will take to analyze arrest data to make sure there are no serious indications of racial profiling in any of the participating communities. help improve training for local law enforcement officers to reduce confusion and ensure there are clear guidelines to

prevent abuse of the program. to inform the public about options they have and recourses they can use if their civil liberties are violated by department action. and finally to help investigate and resolve cases where an individual alleges that their rights were violated. i support these important enforcement programs. and i urge my colleagues to support this amendment. it is fully offset d, as is it required in this appropriations process. and it is not an increase in this program, but simply level funds it at 2012 levels. with that, mr. chairman, i respectfully yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman yields back. the gentleman from alabama is recognized.

mr. aderholt: i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. aderholt: i rise to oppose the amendment. it demoralizes the front line law enforcement personnel. this amendment would actually empower more bureaucrats from washington to look over the shoulders of the hard-working officers in the field that are trying to keep us safe. i would urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment and i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. -- the alyields back. for what reason does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? >> i move to strike the last word. i rise in support of this amendment in order to ensure

that both the 287-g program and the secure communities program are not illegally profiling individuals. the bill before us funds the office of civil rights and civil liberties at a level at $2.2 million below the budget request. now we are in a tight fiscal environment but surely we can meet the needs of our frontline personnel without jeopardizing the careful oversight activities provided by this civil rights and civil liberties office. in fact, at the same time this bill is reducing funding for oversight, it is increasing funding for the controversial and all too often mismanaged 287-g program. three different audits by the inspector general have found serious concerns about the 287-g program and had to terminate some task forces in maricopa county, arizona, after the justice department documented

clear racial profiling and other abuses. we need to make sure that authority is being exercised properly and that is exactly the task of the office of civil rights and civil liberties. i thank the gentlewoman for offering this amendment and i urge colleagues to support it. and i yield back. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from wisconsin. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. the amendment is not agreed to. ms. moore: mr. chairman, i would ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6, rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from wisconsin will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia rise to be recognized? >> i have an amendment at the

desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: page 2, line 17, after the dollar amount insert reduced by $3,365,,,000 mr. broun: i ask unanimous consent that we dispense with the reading of the minutes. the chair: any objection? the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. broun: this amendment would reduce the administrative salaries in the expense accounts in the underlying bill by just 3% with the exception of the u.s. coast guard. it does not affect their expenses. our nation is facing a total economic meltdown. and now more than ever, it is apparent that we have to stop the outrageous spending that is going on here in washington d.c.

over the last two years, house members have reduced their own administrative accounts their members allowances by more than 11%. yet over that same period of time, many agencies have seen minimal reductions and in some cases even increases in their accounts. for a good example, the t.s.a. has only experienced a 3.5% cut in the last two years. i know many of my colleagues can agree that the t.s.a. has not only been a complete and utter failure, but it has been a colossal waste of taxpayer money amounting to almost $60 billion. t.s.a. personnel have not prevented the first terrorist attack happening on american

soil. 17 known terrorists have flown into the united states more than 24 different times. yet this year, t.s.a. screener personnel will receive increased funding for their compensation and benefits that totals more than $30 million above fiscal year 2012. this is totally unacceptable. another example that i would like to point out in the underlying bill is funding for our brand new agency, called the office of biometric identity management. it will receive $200 million for administrative salaries and expense accounts. mr. chairman, we need to be looking for areas where we can make cuts, not the opportunities to grow the size and scope of the federal government. now certainly, we can all agree that many of the offices,

agencies and individuals employed by the department of homeland security are very deserving of the pay for which they receive. but mr. chairman, let's be realistic. if we are serious about reducing spending and reducing our deficit, we have to ask every agency to follow congress' lead and take a small reduction in the administrative funding. instead of asking for increases or trying to create new programs. to be clear, a 3% reduction in these accounts would in many cases still result in less than a 10% reduction in funding from f.y. 2011 levels. while this amount is small, it would pay dividends, huge dividends, resulting in half a billion dollars in savings in this bill alone. it is long past time to get serious about spending, mr. chairman. and this amendment represents a

balanced way to achieve significant savings. i urge my colleagues to support my amendment and to reduce spending in these accounts by just a mere 3%. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from alabama seek recognition? mr. aderholt: strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. aderholt: i rise to reluctantly oppose my good friend from georgia's amendment. he makes some very good points, but one thing as i had mentioned in the debate this afternoon and general debate, this is the third fiscal year in a row that the bill has tried to work at cutting already. fiscal discipline and funding for homeland needs are the two most important things. and as i said earlier, fiscal discipline is something that is a very important aspect of this bill.

the bill actually decreases -- has a decrease of $484 million below last year's bill and $394 million below the president's request. . . we do think we need to be mindful of the situation we find ourselves in in this country but bear in mind that we have cut, we have reached a delicate balance to make sure that we make sure frontline operations are secure, that they are operating at a level that we can make sure that our nation is secure. the office of secretary, for example, has been cut 9% below the president's request and is 8% below the f.y. 2012 act. so, this is the 10th year anniversary of the establishment of the department of homeland security and certainly we've got to make sure that our department is strong, it has strong

management, and my concern is that this amendment would undermine that goal so i would ask members to poe pose this amendment -- to oppose this amendment. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? >> mr. chairman, i move to strike the last words. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. >> mr. chairman, i want to second the remarks of our chairman. i think this is an amendment that while well intentioned in certain respects is not one that we can or should accept. mr. price: i know it's easy to target management and administrative costs. they sometimes lack concreteness, they lack a constituency. but as a matter of fact we depend on these management and administrative functions to run the department and at the end of the day cutting those functions will indeed affect frontline operations. we should make no mistake about

that. in my opinion this bill already cuts administrative functions by imprudent amounts. it already slashes funding for offices at the departmental level, for example, by 21%. below the administration's request. so, while this amendment may be appealing to some, i believe it's unwise and i urge colleagues to oppose it. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from georgia. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. the amendment is not agreed to. mr. broun: mr. chairman. i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from georgia, will be postponed.

for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? >> mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. holt of new jersey. page 2, line 17, after the dollar amount insert, reduce by $10 million. page 6, line 8, after the first dollar amount insert, reduce by $25 million. mr. holt: mr. chairman. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey. mr. holt: i ask unanimous consent that the house dispense with the reading of this amendment. the chair: is there any objection to the dismissing of the reading of the amendment? without objection, so ordered. the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. holt: thank you, mr. chairman. and i thank the chair of this subcommittee and the ranking member for their work they've put into this. i rise with an amendment that is designed to ensure that our rail and transit systems have the additional resources or at least some of the additional resources that they need to help thwart

any potential terrorist attacks on buses and trains. now, just over a year ago when our forces raided osama bin laden's compound, they discovered materials in his hideout indicating that he was planning attacks on rail and transit systems. and we have no reason to believe that al qaeda's recommend nance -- remnants have abandoned any such plans. as we've seen repeatedly, the threat is very real. since 2004, terrorist cells have conducted successful and deadly bombings on major passenger rail systems in spain, the united kingdom, india, with over 600 people killed, thousands wounded. and despite this threat, over the last few years our country has been backsliding in providing our rail and transit systems the resources they need. in years past rail and transit

security funding had its own line item in the budget. but a couple of years ago it was rolled into the overall state and local grant programs and its funding has been slashed and slashed is not an overstatement. from a previous high of $300 million down to only about $88 million this past year. the large reduction was made in the face of an existing $6 billion in rail and transit security funding needs identified by rail and transit operators around the nation as reported by the american public transportation association. i ask, mr. chairman, unanimous consent to include in the record a letter from mr. michael, president of -- and c.e.o. of american transportation association. the chair: covered by general

leave. mr. holt: my amendment addresses part of this shortfall by moving a total of $50 million from three accounts. overall management and administration, intelligence and analysis and the transportation security administration. to the state and local programs grant account for the express purpose of increasing funding available for rail and transit security grants. i make -- i propose these moves reluctantly but we need the funding in the transit security. this would bring to $138 million the account for rail security. well above the $88 million currently there but well below the $300 million that only a few years ago was the funding will -- funding level. this amendment actually saves the taxpayer $36 million because of the difference in the account spenddown rates. it's a responsible amendment, i believe, that addresses a

crucial vulnerability in our rail and transit security posture and i ask support for this amendment. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from alabama seek recognition? mr. aderholt: i oppose the gentleman's amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. aderholt: mr. chairman, i -- as i mentioned, i do rise in opposition to the amendment. this bill cuts programs substantially but in a way that -- or the bill that we have before us that we have brought to the floor is something that has already cut the program substantially across the board but the way that we have cut it we feel is responsible and manageable. some of the cuts that we have had in here, as office of secretary as i mentioned earlier has been cut by 9% below the request, 8% below the f.y. 2012, and it is 18% below the f.y. 2010 level. the bill has reduced management to a bear minimum.

the bill has already cut t.s.a. management by $60 million and $20 million in cut in aviation security account. this amendment that the gentleman from new jersey's bringing up, by taking $15 million more from this account will impair t.s.a.'s ability to manage its aviation security missions and is also simply not responsible. the amendment would slash funding for the department's intelligence programs which represent a core homeland security capability. for grants the bill provides $2.8 billion for homeland security first responder grants, $400 million more than provided in f.y. 2012. of that the bill provides $1.8 billion -- $1.8 billion for the secretary to provide -- to programs that address the highest need based on threat and based on risk.

breaking out specific grants as this amendment does funds projects for various programs without an overreaching lens. so the consolidation of this bill forces the secretary to examine the intelligence and risk and put scarce dollars where they're needed most. i would urge my colleagues to vote no on this amendment. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from north carolina is recognized. mr. price: i move to strike the last word. i want to commend our colleague from new jersey for offering an amendment that takes explicit account about the need -- of the need for robust funding for state and local grant programs including those aimed at rail and transit security. as i noted, as this debate began, we are indebted to chairman aderholt and the majority for increasing funding for these grants in this fiscal

year 2013 bill, over the 2012 levels. but as the gentleman from new jersey has noted, this funding is against a baseline that has been significantly reduced in the previous two fiscal years. i was privileged to serve as chairman of this subcommittee and -- in the years 2007 and 2010. we worked very hard in those years to provide robust funding for important grant programs, increased funding for fema first responder grants, we did by $1 billion, between fiscal 2007 and fiscal 2010. and unfortunately these programs are now under threat. since 2010 funding for fema grants has been cut by nearly 50% to a total level of $1.3 billion for fiscal 2012. those cuts are shortsighted and they're dangerous and i have said so repeat lid. after all, local governments -- repeatedly. after all, local governments are the first responders to emergencies. local law enforcement, fire, emergency, medical and as well

as county public health and other public safety personnel are responsible for the on the ground response and recovery action. local communities are -- secure our ports, transit systems, water supplies, schools and hospitals. so plainly put, these grants protect our communities and are vitally important in our ability to detect, deter and respond to a variety of threats and disasters and the gentleman from new jersey has stressed, our rail and transit systems are an important part of this -- that work and in many cases are very much in need of kind of funding that this bill has provided and should provide. i reluctantly add, though, mr. chairman, that there are problems with these offsets. and i will repeat what the chairman has said about some of the cuts that are included in

these bills, these important accounts. the secretary's office, that might seem an easy thing to cut. but this bill already reduces the secretary's office by 9%. analysis and intelligence, this bill already cuts this by 8%. and t.s.a. aviation security, has one of the largest cuts in this bill, it's $212 million below the 2012 levels. there are very few good places to turn, i realize. and we're so often in a position of trading off worth while objectives but i do feel bound, both to commend the gentleman for calling our attention to these grant programs and the need for robust funding but also to highlight some of the problems with the offsets in this particular amendment. and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time.

the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new jersey. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. the amendment is not agreed to. mr. holt: mr. chairman, for that i ask a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment by the gentleman from new jersey will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? the clerk will read. the clerk: page 3, line 19, office of the undersecretary for management, $213,128,000. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. grimm of new york, page 3, line 23, after the dollar amount insert, reduce by $7,667,000.

page 36, line 4rks after the dollar amount, insert increase by $7,667,000. page 37, line 3, after the dollar amount insert, increase by $7,667,000. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. grimm: thank you, mr. chairman. i rise today in support of my amendment that would fund the national urban search and rescue response service at $35.18 million. which is the level which the senate bill is at. but it still reflects a reduction of $6 million from fiscal year 2012. the national urban search and rescue response provides a significant national resource for search and rescue assistance in the wake of major

disasters and structural collapses. a typical usrr attempt to find trapped victims, they assess and control a hazards such as leaking gas, and evaluate and stabilize structures. due to the lifesaving needs of their mission, usrr task forces must be prepared to deploy within six hours of notification and must be self-sufficient in 72 -- for the first 72 hours. they have been deployed in response to the yop lynn tornado, the japan earthquakes, hurricane ka tree narc the 9/11 attacks on the world city --

world trade center and pentagon, the grain elevator explosion in wichita, kansas, and many other foreign and domestic disasters. in 2006, fema estimated the annual and recurring cost of each task force to be approximately $1.7 million. today in many jurisdiction the costs exceed $2 million. in addition to program management costs, this estimate includes expenses for training, for exercises, medical monitoring of personnel, and equipment maintenance and storage. current federal funding for the nation's usrr teams provides a fraction of the funds necessary to maintain each task force leaving local government sponsors to pick up the remainder of the cost and diverting much-needed funding away from their local first responders' budgets. the recent tornado in joplin, missouri and subsequent response underscore the importance of national search and rescue capability. providing funding for the system will help ensure the

highly skilled teams are available to respond to major energies without jeopardizing the budget priorities for local first responders. therefore i urge you to vote yes on my amendment and properly fund this critical program. >> will the quelt yield? mr. grimm: yes, i will. >> we will accept the gentleman's amendment. mr. grimm: thank you very much. if i can reclaim my time, i want to thank my friend and colleague mr. connolly for all his work in joining me in this effort. i want to say thank you very much. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? >> i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. connolly: i thank the chair and thank the distinguished chairman and my colleague from grimm from new york for this thoughtful amendment and for accepting it. fair tax county, which i represent, is one of the outstanding usrr teams in the

world. they have served both hear in the united states and in many, many manmade and natural tragedies as well as around the world saving lives. and this is a great partnership between local government and the federal government. and it's one that we desperately need to be enhanced. so i very much thank the majority and minority leaders in accepting this thoughtful amendment. i'm proud to join with my colleagues -- colleague mr. grimm in co-sponsoring this amendment as an original co-sponsor, i'm delighted it will be adopted and i insert the rest of my statement into the record. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the question is on the motion offed by the gentleman from new york. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the preponderance of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to.

for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. clarke of michigan, page 3rks line 23, insert -- mr. clarke: mr. speaker. cloim after the dollar amount, insert increase by $10 million. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. clarke: this amendment would add $10 million to state and local program under this budget and the offset would be from the management kfment i'm offering this amendment because our state and local units of government don't have the revenue to adequately protect our citizens in the event of a natural disaster or another emergency. the housing crisis has depressed housing values throughout this country and as

a result has lowered the tax base from which state and local governments depend on raising their revenue. i urge this house to approve this amendment, to better prepare our state and local units of government for emergencies and other natural disasters and terrorist attacks which could occur. i appreciate your support and i yield back my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from alabama seek recognition? >> i rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. aderholt: as i stated earlier, this bill provides $2.8 billion for first responder grants, $400 million more than provided in f.y. 2012. of that, the bill provides $1.8 billion for the secretary to provide to programs that address the highest need based on threat, based on risk. the funding for grants have

been a high priority for our bill this year and we believe there's adequate funding for grants so like i said, i would reluctantly have to oppose the gentleman's amendment. the chair: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman seek recognition? >> i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. >> i rise to commepped the gentleman from michigan for his attention to the need for robust grant programs, fema grant programs for state and local governments in their various emergency preparedness and functions. we -- as we said earlier with respect to mr. holt's amendment, these programs have been underfunded in recent years. we're doing better this year in this bill. but we're building on a depleted base. so i commend him for his attention to this. at the same time, i feel bound

to say that the offset is problematic. the undersecretary for management, i know that sounds like an easy target, but with the grimm-connolly amendment we just adopted, by my calculation that brings the undersecretary for management $30 million below the 2012 level. mr. price: that's 12%. a cut that in my opinion we can ill afford. that's already what we've done with this bill. so eventually, management and administrative cuts do affect front line operations. so i feel bound to say that as we balance the equities here and the immediate for robust grant programs and for making them more robust wherever we can. but at the same time to observe departmental functions. i yield back. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from michigan. those in favor say aye.

those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. the amendment is not agreed. to mr. clarke: i ask for a recorded vote, mr. speaker. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from michigan will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> i have an amendment at the desk. the clerk: the -- the chair: the clerk will read the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. poe of texas. page 3, line 23, after the dollar amount insert reduce by $10 million. page nine, line 14, insert -- after the dollar amount insert in-- increase by $10 million. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. poe: i offer this amendment along with my friend from pennsylvania, mr. altmire. this takes $10 million from the undersecretary of management of d.h.s. and moves it to border security, fencing,

infrastructure and technology account with the purpose of being used for cell phone infrastructure to help residents to disseminate information to border patrol and law eners to -- enforcement for their protection and the security of the border. the history goes back to march 27, 2010, when in arizona, bob crins was burdenered 20 miles north of the border in an isolated area in arizona. the lack of communications capability made him more vulnerable than he would have been otherwise and complicated the search for the assailants. his wife, sue, who i talked to on numerous location, believes he was in a cell phone dead zone when he was killed and he was trying to call for help at the time of his murder. before leaving office, congresswoman giffords had been working diligently on this specific issue. i became involved with her staff when they took the time to show me around the arizona

border and introduce me to krinz's widow, sue. i thank ms. giffords for her work and wish her well. these dead zones are so common that oftentimes border ranchers rely on short wave radios to communicate or call for help. the inability of the u.s. government to secure the u.s.-mexico border creates public safety hazards for residents who live on the border and the law enforcement agents who patrol them. many rural areas are rural and lack requirest -- wireless communications capabilities like cell phone, making it a security issue. i worked with congresswoman giffords and representative altmire to pass a similar emmitt amendment to the department of homeland -- a similar amendment to the department of homeland security bill. we received overwhelming support in this house with a vote of 347-9 .

however the omnibus weakened this provision to make it a mere suggestion for d.h.s. to enforce or to solve this problem. despite that lang wam, the department of homeland security has done very little or anything to address this issue. more work needs to be done and there's a large number of dead zones along our southern border. that's why this amendment is offered again this year. rural areas along the border present a unique public safety challenge that can be addressed through wireless communications in those areas. an additional $10 million can be used to enhance wireless communications capabilities to allow residents to report threats against them and instances of illegal activities to law enforcement. such capabilities would enhance communications among our law enforcement and border protectors. the director of homeland security, the director of the security issues at the government accountability office, recently told the senate homeland security

committee that as it stands right now, we have the ability to prevent or stop illegal entries into the u.s. for only 129 miles of the 1,954 mile u.s. board we are mexico. he continued to say we have achieved, quote, an acceptable level of control on 873 miles of the border, whatever acceptable level of control means, i'm not sure. in any event, that means 1,081 miles of the united states border is the wide open spaces, mr. chairman. we simply cannot stop illegal crossings of any kind in those areas. the united states doesn't control that area of the border, mexico does not either.

i suspect it's the border -- it's the drug cartels that control that area of our sovereignty. if the federal government ♪ going to secure the border, the least we can do is give the border residents a chance to call exrmen -- call for help when they immediate help that will go a long way in allowing american citizens to have a safer place to live and communicate with law enforcement. the office though undersecretary for management at d.h.s. is funded at $13 million. $10 million is a 4.5 reduction in that account. i think as the ranking member we need public safety as opposed to more funding for the management secretary. i yield back the balance of of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. altmire: i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. lt -- mr. altmire: i would like to thank my friend, congressman poe, for his strong leadership on this issue and for working with me on the critical importance of expanded mobile communications along the southern border. i had the opportunity to visit the district of our former colleague, gabrielle giffords, in southwest arizona where i met with customs and border patrol agents, examined

construction of the border fence and spoke with ranchers and residents who live and work in the remote areas along the u.s.-mexico border. in rural areas along that border, cell phone service is virtually nonexistent and where service does exist, it's often unreliable. some ranchers even have to resort to communicating through the use of two-way radios. the lack of cell phone service presents an obvious safety issue for ranchers, as my friend congressman poe outlined, and it's a safety issue for residents and the national guard troops who patrol that protected area. if a rancher feels threatened, he cannot currently call for help or alert law enforcement to the situation. so to address this issue, our amendment adds $10 million to the general account for border security fencing, infrastructure and techtology -- technology to extend wireless areas along the board

e. they may be used by the department of homeland security to enter into public-private partnerships to provide a more reliable communications link between law enforcement officials and citizens who live and work in our border areas. last year congressman poe and i offered a similar amendment that passed with a strong bipartisan vote of 327-93, but despite its inclusion in last year's omnibus funding measure, little action has to date been taken by d.h.s. to implement stronger cell coverage along the u.s.-mexico border. i urge support of our amendment to show d.h.s. that the safety of our southern boarder is a priority for this congress. this is a problem we can and must fix. supporting this amendment will not increase spending but what it will do is protect the public and increase the effectiveness of law enforcement in rural

border areas. i ask my colleagues to support this amendment and yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from alabama seek recognition? mr. aderholt: yes, mr. chairman, i rise in opposition to this amendment. i do commend the gentleman from texas and pennsylvania for -- gentlemen from texas and pennsylvania for their attention to border security. border security is a top priority with this subcommittee and with this chairman. but the amendment that is before us at this time proposes to cut the department of homeland security to pay for cell towers, to provide phone service actually to the general public. and i am very sympathetic to the needs of rural communities, i represent a rural community. and certainly sympathetic to remote ranchers. but this is smple simply not a -- this is simply not a cost that homeland security can bear. this proposal would cut the department's management functions below what is

responsible for our nation's security. the bill already cuts the office of undersecretary for management 4% below the request of the president and 11% below the f.y. 2012 level. and it should be noted that this bill fully funds the department's tactical communications. so i would urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment and i would yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? mr. price: i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. price: mr. chairman, i rise also to oppose this amendment. i do so reluctantly. because i know that the need that representative poe and representative altmire are addressing is a real one. there are a vast expanses of territory -- there are vast expanses of territory, including a lot of territories need the borders that suffer from a lack of mobile communications and we

do need to work in concert with state and local governments in the private sector to address this need. this is not something, though, that this bill or the department of homeland security can take on. it simply is not -- it's not feasible. it is not a d.h.s. function. so we need to work on it but i think this remedy is flawed and i once again say that i know it's an easy target, to go after the administrative expenses of the department. but in this case the undersecretary for management is already something like 12% below the 2012 level, that is assuming the passage of the grimm-connolly amendment. and i do not think further cuts can or should be sustained. and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from texas. those those -- those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. . in the opinion of the chair, the

noes have it. the amendment is not agreed to. mr. poe: mr. chairman. i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18 further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from texas will be post pobed. -- pone to -- postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? >> mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. run can of new jersey. after the -- runyan of new jersey. page 41, line 22, after the dollar amount insert, increase by $5 million. page 41, line 23, after the dollar amount insert, increase by $2,500,000. page 41, line 25, after the dollar amount insert, increase by $2,500,000. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. runyan: mr. chairman, my amendment increases funding for staffing for adequate fire and emergency response grant by $2.5

million and assistance to firefighters grants, restoring these programs to f.y. 2012 levels. the funding increases deficit neutral as it's offset by a $5 million increase to the office of the undersecretary for management. these grants provide a vital -- vital funding for our nation's first responders to help them adequately staff fire houses and to provide the necessary specialized equipment to protect our brave men and women. with first responders' budgets being slashed all around the country, this is -- this portion of funding will help ensure that fire departments can adequately respond to our constituents' emergencies. during this period of budgetary constraints, we must prioritize the programs we need the most. my amendment clearly shows that our brave first responders are a priority. this amendment is endorsed by

the international association of firefighters and the international association of fire chiefs. and i thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for helping me support this amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? mr. clarke: mr. speaker, to comment on the amendment offered by mr. runyan, the gentleman from new jersey. the chair: does the gentleman move to strike the last word? mr. clarke: do move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. clarke: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to thank the gentleman from new jersey, mr. runyan, for offering this amendment. i have joined him along with this in a bipartisan fashion because our local units of government, they need this money to be able to rehire their firefighters and to get the training equipment that they need to better prepare our firefighters to respond to a natural disaster or a terrorist attack. i support this amendment.

this will help cities like detroit and other municipalities in metro detroit who need to apply for these funds, this provides more money back to the level in prior years so that our communities can be safer. again, i want to commend the maker of this amendment. he has my support. i'm honored to be on this amendment as a co-sponsor. and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from alabama seek recognition? mr. aderholt: i rise to -- we accept the gentleman from new jersey's amendment and considering the fact that this is only -- the chair: does the gentleman move to strike the last word? mr. aderholt: i move to strike the last word. considering this is only a $5 million cut, we do accept the gentleman from new jersey's amendment and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time.

for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? mr. price: mr. chairman, i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. price: mr. chairman, i rise in support of this amendment -- >> mr. chairman, i rise in support of this amendment. i appreciate my colleague from new jersey bringing this forward and i agree with him and i would like to point out that just, for example, june 17, through 23, that week is the e.m.s. fire safety survival week. it's just one of the many weeks that we recognize our firemen for what they do for us and the importance of what they do for us. mr. kissell: there's an image of 9/11, the firemen, and what they did for our nation in new york when we were attacked. but that image is also recurring throughout the nation, throughout the communities, when firemen come to our homes, or come to our businesses, or go to scenes of accidents. anywhere our communities need them, the firemen go.

this restoring of the grants is just something that we should do and i'm glad that we are going to do -- to secure that bond, allow them the training and equipment they need to take care of us. so this is an investment in them so they can take care of us. i appreciate my colleague bringing this amendment forward. a very happy and proud to be on this amendment and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? mr. price: mr. chairman, i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. price: mr. chairman, i rise in strong support of firefighter grant programs. i applaud chairman aderholt for fully funding the budget request for these programs. that is providing $670 million for the assistance to firefighter grant program equal request divided between safer hiring grants and equipment grants. i also commend the chairman for accepting the amendment our colleagues have just offered.

although again the offset is not what one would wish, this is a case i think where the consideration, the balance of values clearly leads us to bring this program to the president's funding levels which is what the amendment does. we have approved in committee these firefighter grants and we've also proved the -- approved the continuation of waivers. that was my amendment in committee and i am pleased that we were able to adopt those. the waivers, economic hardship waivers that are currently in place. the law traditionally permits safer grants only to be used to hire new firefighters. now, that provision makes sense when our economy is booming and local governments are in a position to hire new workers. but when the local budgets are continuing to shrink and some fire stations are closing their

doors and others are laying off workers, fema needs flexibility. the flexibility to use these grants, to keep firefighters from being laid off in the first place. the administration has requested and fema administrator testified to this need earlier this year during our appropriations hearings. i believe strongly in the need to assist local fire departments in ensuring they have the personnel and the equipment necessary to keep our communities safe. whenists chairman of this subcommittee from 2007 to 2010 we were able to more than double the funding for the safer program. reaching a peak of $410 million in fiscal year 2010. so, it's regrettable that we're not still able to maintain that level. because any cuts to firefighter grants do result in thousands of fewer firefighters on the job, they leave fewer departments able to maintain safe staffing levels, much less to add needed

personnel. so, we need to maintain this support. and the real challenge in many communities is not the reluctance of local governments to hire new personnel, it's the potential and actual layoffs of personnel which would mean reduced levels of safety. so, it's very important for us to maintain robust grant funding for these programs. it's go -- it's going to help preserve public safety and security and this bill, we provided for that and this amendment adds to that so i urge its adoption and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new jersey. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to.

the clerk will read. the clerk: page 5, line 4, office of the chief financial officer, $49,743,000 of which $6,700,000 shall remain available until september 30, 2014, for systems modernization. office of the chief information officer, $241,543,000 of which $1,1 -- $124,673,000 to remain available until september 30, 2015. analysts and operations, $317,400,000 of which $93, 764,000 shall remain available until september 30, 2014. office of inspector general, $109,264,000. title 2, security, enforcement and investigations, u.s. customs and border protections, salaries and expenses, $8,366,024,000.

the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? >> thank you, mr. chairman. i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. grijalva of arizona. page 7, line 13, after the first dollar amount insert, increase by $30 million. page 9, line 14, after the dollar amount, insert, reduce by $30 million. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from alabama seek recognition? mr. aderholt: i reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment. the chair: point is order of is reserved. the gentleman from arizona is recognized for five minutes. mr. grijalva: thank you again, mr. chairman. i rise today to offer an amendment to the department of homeland security appropriations bill. it strengthens our efforts to have a secure and proper bored. as you know, the issues at the -- that are foremost in the

thoughts of people across this country, as was noted when my friend and colleague from arizona, mr. flake, in his amendment that acknowledged that reality, that strengthening the ports of entry should be a national priority. his amendment was accepted as a means to begin to increase and pay attention to that national priority. it's a jobs issue. and it is a security issue. land and port security are the drives of the u.s. economy and also facilitate legitimate trade and travel while preventing unauthorized entry and contraband from crossing the border. along the nearly 2,000 mile border with mexico, u.s. customs and border protection -- while significant investments in the border have

been made in recent years, including the opening of three new crossings in 2010, more is demanded. staffing at our land ports of entry have been severely overlooked, compromising our national and economic security. while a necessary buildup of border enforcement has occurred in the last 10 year that proportional increase and attention to customs and ports of entry has not occurred. it is estimated that in arizona alone, our ports of entry need 500 additional officers to meet staffing needs. 250 at the port of entry in novales, 150 in san ue luis. nationwide there's a need for up to 5,000 additional c.b.p. officers. these shortages are alarming and have alarming consequence. in 2008, g.a.o. report said, weakness in travel inspections exist in our nations port of entry and according to this report, office managers said

staffing shortages created vulnerabilities in the inspection process. in 2008, the department of commerce found that the cumulative loss in output due to border delays over the next 10 years is estimated at $86 billion. our economy and security will continue to be compromised unless we take strong measures. my amendment seek os so -- seeks to redirect within the account of border infrastructure, additional funds for personnel sorely needed. let me end by indicating some facts and points of reference. u.s.-mexico bilateral points of ade reached 4 billion in 2010. mexico is the second largest market for education ports in the u.s. mexico spent $100 billion on u.s. goods. to 2 states count on mexico as their number one or two market

and it's top five for 14 other states. one in every 24 workers in the nation depend on u.s.-mexico trade for their employment. this is an issue of the economy, it's an issue about jobs, my amendment merely addresses the reality. from unobligated and enhanced -- and enhancement funds within the budget to transfer $30 million to begin that initial step to bring our ports of entry and customs to a full force in terms of staffing and to begin to expedite legitimate trade and end long waiting periods, improve our economy and yes, indeed, continue to provide the advance security that we need on those borders. with that, mr. chairman, thank you and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from alabama seek

recognition? mr. aderholt: i insist on the point of order. the amendment proposes to amend prgses of -- portions of the bill not yet read. the amendment may not be considered en bloc under clause 2-f of rule 21 because the amendment proposes to increase the level of outlays in the bill. i ask for a ruling from the chair. the chair: does any member wish to be heard on this point of order? if not, the chair will rule. the amendment does not qualify under clause 2-f of rule 21 proposing net increase in outlays to be considered en bloc pursuant to clause 2-f of rule 21, an amendment must not propose to increase the levels of budget authority or outlays in the bill. because the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona proposes a net increase in the level of outlays in the bill as argued by the chairman of the subcommittee on appropriations, it may not avail itself of

clause 2-f to address portions of the bill not yet read. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california seek recognition? >> mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by ms. hahn of california, page 7, insert increase by $11 million. page 15, line 2, after the dollar amount, instert reduce by $24,500,000. page 55, line four, after the dollar amount, insert reduce by $24,500,000. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized for five minutes. ms. hawn: thank you, mr. chairman. my amendment is simple. it would increase $10 million in funding to the customs and border protection salary and expense account and decrease funding of the national bio-

and agr offering-defense by $24,250,000 in order to increase staffing of the c.b.p. agents in our nation's airports. this amendment is intended to strengthen security and improve the american business advantage by putting more c.b.p. agents in our airports so that they can hand they will continuously growing number of travelers to this country. my own district in california is bookended by two great economic engines of the los angeles region, the port of los angeles at the southern end and the los angeles international airport at the north. one of the common complaints that i hear from l.a.x. airport is that there are smply not enough customs and border protection agents to effectively process the amount of visitors that enter this country every year. in fact, delays at our country's airports have

resulted in losing nearly $100 billion in economic output over the last 10 years. if we want to continue being a top destination for immigrants, foreign visitors and business people, we need to establish a welcoming presence to people who wish to visit this country. this means ensuring we have an efficient c.b.p. staff that can continue to handle the growing number of people who visit this country. in a letter sent from the l.a. world airport to the united states customs and border protection commissioner, it states that, quote, insufficient c.b.p. staff has triggered alarming delays for l.a.x. international passengers waiting to be processed through customs and immigration. while this shortage referred to l.a.x. airport, delays due to personnel shortages are prevalent throughout our entire country. i think this is extremely concerning. these dilays are weakening our

competitiveness in the global market, slowing the pace of business and impeding the commerce we need to fuel our economic recovery this adds to our nation's airlines and business people's costs. what's more, we know if we overextend and overwork our already heroically overperforming c.b.p. personnel guarding the gateways to our nation, they are more likely to miss things. something or someone is more likely to get through. they deserve support and numbers equal to the scale of the task that we are charging them with. while i understand the intended purpose of the national by yo- and agro-defense facility, the reality is it was appropriated $75 million even though the president didn't need or request these funds. additionally, the d.h.s. is waiting for the design modifications and for the administration to review the cost and scope of the project which isn't expected to be completed until 2020.

i think the funds are better spent on increasing the security and promoting american commerce through our country's airports. that commerce that flows through our international airports powers our economy, keeps the united states a global leader in business. we need to preserve that commerce will protecting our homeland from those who would try to sneak through and do us harm. thank you and i urge my colleagues to support what i think is a very important and crucial amendment. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: you may not reserve. the gentlewoman yields back. ms. schakowsky: i yield back my time. the chair: for what purpose does the gentlewoman rise? >> i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized. >> i rise to join the gentlelady from california in requesting this increase in border protection. if our nation is going to compete globally we need to think of ports of entry as

strategic assets and real opportunities to expand our economy. mrs. davis: without adequate resources and staffing, wait times at ports of entry grow longer and longer. every minute, mr. chairman, the goods and people sit at the border waiting to cross is an opportunity lost. that's opportunities lost for american businesses, for manufacturers, and workers. in total, these long delays are projected to result in lost output of more than $86 billion over the next 10 years. in this tough economy, i don't think we can afford to lose these precious dollars. and yet, despite the overwhelming need, increases in staffing in past years represent only a small fraction of what is needed to fully staff our ports of entry according to the government accountability office. to fully meet this need, we need to ensure that c.b.p. has the resources it needs to get

the job done. and at a time when we need commerce to be moving full steam ahead, to drive an economic recovery, we can't afford understaffing our ports of entry. additional funding provided by this amendment to hire additional c.b.p. officers will allow for faster processing times through ports of entry and allow those goods to flow through our borders. by facilitating trade, we not only support businesses and jobs but we also add revenue. c.b.p. is the largest single source of revenue for the treasury, it's only second to the internal revenue service. as my colleague has stated, the offset for this provision is a cut in funding for the national bio-and a fwmbings ro- business facility, which was appropriated $75 billion despite the despite the fact

the administration didn't request these funds. they are reviewing the security risks of the design measures now. before that risk is fully mitigated, it is premature, i think, to appropriate additional funds, especially when funding for f.y.-2011 and f.y.-2012 remains unobligated. so this amendment, mr. chairman, will put these dollars to better use by promoting our economic growth and i urge my leagues to join us in supporting it. with that, i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. for what purpose does the gentleman from alabama seek reck mission? mr. aderholt: i rise in opposition to the jeament's amendment. this bill already provides robust funding for border security operations and -- operations. in fact this year we increase border security inspection and trade facilitation by $85 million above the president's

request. c.b.p. border security is important. we -- i totally agree. but let me mention that the funding that we've increased supports 21,186 c.b.p. officers and other increases in the national targeting center and global entry among other programs and initiatives to increase efficiency in c.b.p. operations. c.b.p.'s budget faces real challenges. 70% of c.b.p. funds goes to pay and benefits from 65% just last year. this figure does not include costs associated with supporting front line officers such as equipment and facilities much less new tech tholing. the committee report outlines opportunities for better managing fee funds and innovating c.b.p. processes. further the secretary has not yet submitted the work load staffing allocation model that staffing allocation model that will justify