the p-5 plus 1 deal was very, very bad and why the prime minister netanyahu was rightly concerned about not only the national security of the jewish state of israel and the national security of the united states and freedom-loving people around the world. let's look at this document that was put together by senator kirk. they would get in cash $60 billion. some of the literature i read said up to $50 billion would be free and available to iran. at minimum they would have act stose $3 billion in cash. this is an actor, the state of iran, which was found illegally

creating nuclear material for their stated purpose of creating a nuclear weapon to use to wipe out not only israel, but to wipe the united states of america off the face of the map. and if there's anything that history has taught us, mr. speaker, it is this -- it is that when a madman speaks, freedom-loving nations should listen. the leader in iran is called the supreme leader. he's not called that for no reason. it isn't the president of the country who is truly the throne in iran. it is the religious leader named khomeini. the president's -- the presidents come and go but khomeini, the supreme leader, remains the same. his announced intentions are completely clear. iran seeks to be the hedge mono. in other words -- the hegemon. in other words, iran seeks to be the dominant power not only

in the mideast region but they have evidence of dabbling in the far east, in china. in philippines. in south america. they intend to have their fingers in places all over the world because they intend to dominate. they intend to dominate with shia religion, they intend to dominate through the use of nuclear weaponry. through the most vile form of violence that there is in the world. in order to achieve their objectives. so again, let's look at what iran would have gotten had the nation of france not intervened and put a stop to this disastrous bill, thor disastrous effort and agreement -- or this disastrous effort and agreement that would have had the potential of changing the course of human history. here's what iran would get. $3 billion in cash, minimum. some report upwards of $50 billion in cash.

$9.6 billion in gold reserves for the iranian regime. over $5 billion in petrochemicals for the nation. $1.3 billion in automobiles. iran is heavily engaged in the production of automobiles and this would have given them that revenue. enriched uranium for one bomb. why in the world would p-5 plus one, the nations that met in geneva, switzerland, allow iran to have enriched uranium from one bomb when they've already stated their intention if they have that bomb? we also know that iran has plans to be involved in having intercontinental ballistic missiles. in other words, they not only want to bomb -- they not only want a bomb, mr. speaker, they want a delivery system and they need a delivery system that goes just so far to be able to get to israel but they seek a

delivery system, mr. speaker, that could take their bomb to united states targets as well. united states targets here in the homeland, but united states targets as well overseas. and it does -- it just doesn't end with iranning, mr. speaker. if iran gains a nuclear weapon, what the world must know, is that the weapon will not simply remain within the boundaries and in the hands of a nuclear iran. that would be bad enough. what we do know is that saudi arabia has already had to make plans to defend herself. he already has a preorder into a nuclear pakistan, forward order for a -- for an order for a nuclear weapon because saudi arabia knows they will be a target from a nuclear iran if irap obtains that weapon. so therefore, we'll see another

nation, saudi arabia that will have to have a nuclear weapon. but it won't stop with saudi arabia, mr. speaker. we know that egypt, then, will be seeking a nuclear weapon. and let's not forget, prior to ly 4 of this year, 2013, the violent terrorist organization known as the muslim brotherhood was the legitimate government of the state of egypt. imagine the violent terrorist organization known as the muslim brotherhood with a nuclear weapon. also imagine turkey with a nuclear weapon. imagine then that we are no longer talking nation states. now what we could be talking about very well with iran having a nuclear weapon would be some of its umbrella protect rats. i. re : , his boll lark the terrorist organization primarily located in lebanon just north of israel's border.

also would in all likelihood have access to a nuclear weapon or have one located on israel's northern border. syria could also have a nuclear weapon. and from there we could be talking about, mr. speaker, al qaeda having a nuclear weapon. with miniaturization. perhaps the al nuss rah front. -- al nusra front. or any of the other myriad terrorist organizations that there are around the world. you see, mr. speaker, the entire paradigm of the world's structure could change. quite literally. and for what? what is it that we would have gotten out of this very bad deal that the united states was about to enter into? it makes no sense. you see, we would have gotten zero centrifuges dismantled. what's a centrifuge? that's what's used by iran to

enrich uranium, the fissile material that's required to create a nuclear bomb. we would have gotten zero dismantled. iran would have continued to maintain not only control and ownership of their centrifuges, let's face it, let's not kid ourselves, those centrifuges and have continued to run spun enriched uranium. we would have gotten zero ounces of iran -- of uranium shipped out of iran. that's the whole ballgame, mr. speaker. the estimate today as we stand here is that iran has enrichude rain yum to the tune of nine to 10 tons, well over the amount needed to have a nuclear bomb. you see that must be the first condition, not the last. not one that's off the table. that's the fers season to lift any sanction. -- first condition to lift any

sanction. iran must first make sure -- we must first make sure that all the enriched uranium leaves the nation of iran because again, we know their stated intention. that must go. we also get out of this deal zero facilities closed. we know there's multiple facilities against and in violation of u.n. resolution after u.n. resolution after u.n. resolution. iran has continued to be one of the biggest violate yoffers u.n. resolutions that there are in the world today. one nuclear facility after another, including a plutonium facility, a heavy water reactor or some pronounce it araq. why would we do this? why allow them to continue the means of production for nuclear weapons, we get nothing in

return. they get $3 billion. some say $50 billion. we get nothing in return. are we mad? thank god for the french. thank god for the french foreign minister who said this was a sucker's deal. who the prime minister benjamin netanyahu said this was a very, very bad deal. it's the deal of the century. why would we continue to reward bad behavior and a bad actor? why would we allow no delay on the plutonium reactor? why would there be no stop in missile testing. let's face it, what do they want the missiles for? who is attacking iran right now? and yet we would allow them to continue to test missiles, the delivery system for a nuclear weapon? no stop in terrorism? who is the exporter of terrorism? it's iran who exports terrorism to lebanon?

it's iran. through hezbollah. who exports terrorism in syria al-assad has killed over 100,000 of his people. it is iran. imagine iran with a nuclear weapon. and the terror that would be exported once they have that nuclear weapon. and no stop in the human rights abuses. all this they get they get a plutonium reactor, 3,000 new centrifuge the enriched uranium for a bomb. while we were over in israel this last week, we heard from the prime minister that there are well over 18,000 centrifuges running today. the first level of purity that is reached in uranium is 3.5%. the second level that is reached is 20%. from there it is a hop and a skip, literally, only weeks, to get to 90% purity which is what

is required for a nuclear bomb. we are virtually sitting on the edge of a nuclear iran with no wiggle room left. finally, finally, finally we're beginning to see the beginning of the economic sanctions coming to work. just when they're coming to bear, just when iran is about to buckle at the knee, come to the table and actually agree to something over here on this side of the scorecard, you see, mr. speaker, it's a big goose egg on this side of the scorecard with the freedom-loving people of the world seek, what the american people seek, what the jewish people of the state of israel seek. we can't zero -- we get zero on this scorecard. while the iranian -- while the iranian nuclear program is allowed to continue apace. moving forward toward the

ultimate goal of the nuclear weapon and the means of delivery. and all the while, working on miniaturization, miniaturization, so that the nuclear warhead can deliver its deadly, lethal target to the most vulnerable people in the world. and wouldn't it be horrible and wouldn't it be sick if a city here in the united states would be a recipient of one of those nuclear war heads. why? because in the midst of foolishness, the p-5 plus one thought it would be a good idea to let the iranians continue their nuclear program. may it never be. there was an article that was just published and it was published by someone that i have great administration for in the "wall street journal." very smart guy named brett stevens.

brett had a column that came out, i'd like to quote from his column, he talked about, again this last weekend and the fact that the world dodged a bullet, just barely, not because of the obama administration's efforts, i'm sorry to say, and not because of the efforts of the united kingdom, i'm sorry to say. but because of the french. and we have them to thank. the talks, and i quote, unexpectedly fell apart at the last minute when the french foreign minister publicly objected to what he called a sucker's deal, meaning that the united states was prepared to begin lifting sanctions on iran in exchange for tentative iranian promises that they would slow their multiple nuclear programs. now this is very important that i read this, mr. speaker. because brett stevens goes on to say in his article, not stop their nuclear program, not suspend their nuclear program, mind you. much less dismantle them.

but merely reduce their pace. from troun jog. when they're on mile 23 of their nuclear marathon. he said it says a rot about the administration that they so wanted a deal that they would have been prepared to make one. and what this deal would have meant, quite simply, mr. speaker is that we would have seen an iran with a nuclear bomb very soon than means to deliver it and put the world on edge. may it never be. thank god for the french. that's what happens when the a game ween politics as of perception and policy as the pursuit of national objectives disolved. i think this is a very important weekend and it's important to know that this isn't over. you see, what happened is that there was a delay. a delay, i suppose, what, to

buy the vote of the french? to take their arm and twist it bheender that back? because now the pressure is on france and the -- in the p-5 plus one. the pressure is on france. seven days from today, mr. speaker, there will be another meeting. our secretary of state, john kerry who insists that there -- that this deal and that he and the united states aren't blind and aren't stupid with this deal, he insisted this on "meet the press" last sunday, he's stating that he believes that there will be a deal with iran and that there will be one quickly. and my question, mr. speaker, to the secretary of state or to anyone in the obama administration that's in the process of working on this deal with the nuclear iran, my question would be, is this what the deal is that you're intending to strike? we get zero, and iran gets the ability to develop a nuclear

bomb. what's the deal? what's in that? enge we need to ask the lead negotiator, whose name is wendy sherman, this is president obama's lead negotiator, chief nuclear negotiator in this very crucial negotiation, which has the potential to change the course of history. 19 8, >> she worked on a presidential campaign and democrat national committee, this is the person who is striking this deal right now on a nuclear iran and c.e.o. of the fannie may foundation and charity that was shut down 10 years later for using a tax-exempt contribution to advance corporate interests. she went to the state department and served as a point person in cluke collar negotiations and

met with kim junk il. she thought he was smart, engaged, knowledgeable, self-confident. she called him a regular guy. she was found working for her former boss before she went to the number three spot at the state department. from there, the arc of her career has gone to be now in charge of this effort of giving away the ability to iran to be able to continue on a pace and develop a nuclear bomb. again, may it never be. when we were in israel on friday evening, we found out, mr. speaker, that the obama administration had gone much further in this effort than we had thought, because a story came out in "the daily beast," in an article by eli lake and he

said in this very bad deal that once the current president was elected in june, rouhani, that the obama administration began then to already ease the sanctions on iran. it's something that none of us could even begin to imagine, that even without consulting congress, the treasury department issued notice in june that they wouldn't be checking on those who violate the sanctions deals. in other words, there wouldn't be the type of sanctions going out and the type of punishments, if you will, for bad actors that were doing trades with iran. in other words, the obama administration already beginning past june, according to the article that came out on friday, were already evening out the scorecard. bonusese already giving

to iran, and why? because rouhani was seen quote as a moderate. even in september, president obama himself wanted to be able to meet and talk and discuss without any precondition at all with the leader of iran. there is a read that happened in the leadership in iran. they looked to the united states and they tested the pulse of the obama administration and they w that they could get what benjamin netanyahu called a very, very, very bad deal for freedom-loving people across the world. the leadership in iran saw something else. they thought they could get a sucker's deal, in the word of the french diplomat and negotiator. that's not what the american people want. they want to know when they tuck

their children in bed at night, that the world will be secure for them and they won't have to worry about a nuclear weapon coming within the borders of the united states of america, or of any nation. no one wants to see a nuclear nightmare. but if the obama administration needs to recognize that in order to alleviate the burden of a nuclear nightmare, we must never ever, ever allow iran to have a nuclear bomb and the means to deliver that bomb. you see, when we were in israel, mr. speaker, we were told by some of the leadership in israel, that there are 25 nations that have civilian capability of having nuclear power, but only five nations enrich uranium in order to have the fissile material. when you have a responsibility,

you have to act responsible. and those nations have acted responsibly with the fissile material. the argument from iran is different. a say they have an in-- right to enrich. all nations don't have the right when they have spoken irresponsibly and in violation of u.n. resolution after u.n. resolution and said no to international atomic energy inspectors coming to iran to check on what iran is doing in regards to uranium enrichment and in regards to nuclear reactors or the plutonium heavy water reactor, the door is slammed in the face of the inspectors. they are told maybe some other time. think of that with your teenager and want to check your

teenager's room, said, not this time, maybe tomorrow. does that raise a few suspicions in your mind? usually it does. and in the case of the security of the people of the world, that should definitely raise our concern. so why would we give the benefit of the doubt to a nation that has thumbed its knows at the united nations security council and thumbed its nose at the international atomic energy inspectors. why would we give them the benefit of the doubt? why would the obama administration give them the benefit of the doubt? when wendy sherman has negotiated one of the biggest failures in north korea, what north korea obtaining nuclear weaponry and missile capability, that is absolute failure, failure for the world and failure for this negotiator. now the same negotiator is

trying to strike this deal where it looks to me where iran is getting it all, and the freedom-loving people of the world are getting a goose egg. this is a very bad deal. mr. speaker, i think it's time to pull wendy sherman back off of this project. this isn't working. i think the united states should pull back and not be a part of the p-5 plus-1. we need to take a big step backwards and take a deep breath and do a thorough review of the history of iran and iran's violation. and this is bipartisan, mr. speaker. this is not republicans beating up on the obama administration. there are numerous democrats including senator menendez and numerous colleagues, they are pro-israel, pro-american national security.

they don't want to see a nuclear iran any more than republicans do. this is not a partisan issue, mr. speaker. this is completely bipartisan. in fact, i believe if we would put a resolution on the floor of this house calling on the obama administration to say no to this very, very, very bad deal, to a sucker's deal in the words of the french diplomat, i believe we would see a very strong bipartisan agreement. why? because as a body, democrat, republican, we are truly, not just in word, but in deeds, we are pro-israel. we are first pro-united states. first pro--- pro our national security interests. i'm privileged to sit on the house intelligence committee. we deal with the classified secrets of the nation. nd i compliment my colleague representative ruppersberger because they have made a

decision that when it comes to america's national security, the partisanship gets checked outside the door. we are completely bipartisan when we go in that committee, as it should be. and when it comes to making sure that a rogue, perhaps even an evil regime does not have access to nuclear weapons, well, that's probably the most bipartisan move that could ever come out of this body. and i believe it will, because i trust my democrat colleagues to also believe and understand that a nuclear iran is a very, very bad idea. i believe the senate will see it the same way. i think they'll see again agreement on both sides of the aisle, because this is about america. this is about our national security. it's about the security interests in the future of the world. it's about the national security

interests of our friend, the jewish state of israel. it's about her survival. that 's about making sure violent terrorist organizations never ever ever ever ever have access to nuclear fissile material and the means and capability of creating a nuclear bomb and delivering it on innocent people anywhere across the world. we want a peaceful world and we will not have a peaceful world if mad men have a nuclear weapon. it's a bipartisan issue. it is a peace issue. and it's an issue, i believe, mr. speaker, that should capture our attention. and if i could ask how many minutes i have remaining. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman has seven minutes

remaining. mrs. bachmann: i thank the speaker. i would like to refer to, again, one of my colleagues who also has eloquently written on this subject and i would like to give her credit as well, a former member of this body, but a wonderful member that i had the privilege of traveling to the middle east with. she was defeated in her last election. a democrat colleague. i have great respect for her. she and i traveled toll israel, we traveled to pakistan, we travel to kuwait. representative berkley and i would like to read some of her words. she said the deal that's in the works with iran is far worse than anyone could have possibly imagined. she said that the details are still emerging on this deal or was nearly put together over the weekend in geneva and she said by all accounts and despite all

denials, the united states is actively pursuing a catastrophic agreement with iran, it's one that would facilitate the nuclear isation of extreme violent and tyranny on earth with consequences that will be regretted for generations. shelly berkley of nevada gets it. she understands that this isn't a short-term action. she understood that if iran obtains a nuclear weapon, that this would change the course of history for generations and one that would be near impossible to roll back, because of the idea of proliferation and won't -- wouldn't be just iran, but it would be rogue terrorist organizations. the centerpiece of the deal, from the west's perspective is iran's agreement to convert its

stockpiles to fuel for civilian use and halt enrichment for six months. now it's interesting, we just met this last week with the leader of intelligence in israel and he told us about part of this very, very, very bad deal would include iran not firing up their heavy water plutonium reactor in iraq. well, he said the joke on all of that is that this reactor won't even go on line for use until next august. so iran gives up absolutely nothing in this deal. you see, it's a scam. they don't even have an ability in the next six months to fire up this reactor. so iran agreeing not to develop any plutonium from that reactor is a zero. it's a goose egg. it's a nonstarter. these are the negotiators?

i know one thing, i wouldn't want them negotiating my salary at my next job. they don't get it. they don't understand what's at stake or do they? that's how important this is. the entire question of on 20% of enriched uranium is a smoke screen. for many years, making a bomb went like this. first, you spend a lot of time enriching uranium to 3.5% purity. that's difficult to do. but that's exactly what iran would be allowed to continue to do. then you enrich what you created to 20% purity. when you have had enough of that and the centrifuges that iran has now are better, faster and quicker than what they had before. five times faster, as a matter of fact. you would be in a position to convert that material to 90% purity that is good enough for a nuclear warhead.

n recent months, in recent months, they've ep creased centrifuges, they have 19,000 centrifuges at their disposal. today, experts say new york just a few weeks' time iran could go from 3.5% all the way bomb-making is material for iran. the whole issue of 20% enrichment has become absolutely irrelevant. instead, the most important questions are how much 3.5% enriched uranium they have and whether they're allowed to keep their centrifuges spinning. if the answer to both is yes, they're moving forward on a bomb. that's why, mr. speaker if we have a deal with iran, the number one parameter that must be included, and i spoke with both the current intelligence director and the former intelligence director of israel and they both said, a

nonfwosheable is that iran has give up the nine to 10 tons of enrichude rain yum they have on hand. why wouldn't you? why wouldn't they be forced to give up the fissile material to make a bomb. it only makes sense. number two, they need to give enriched lity to make uranium. the world is saying, you have you want to have the material, the nuclear materials you need for a peaceful civilian use of power, you want, for instance, nuclear reactors, that's fine. the world has no problem with nuclear power for true electricity or if they want radioisotopes for cancer resenl, no problem. but that means that the material comes into iran and it is used for its civilian purpose and we have inspectors.

that's reasonable. we have countries like spain that have civilian use nuclear reactors. they bring their uranium in and they don't enrich it themselves and there are inspector. same with sweden. same with other countries. this is fine to have nuclear reactors for electricity. we would back that. but we what we will not back, what we must not ever back, is the ability for iran to create a nuclear bomb. that does not change in the current obama administration effort of the deal that came out and was thankfully put on hold by the french at geneva at the p-5 plus one. the new agreement will allow iran to continue to freely nrich to 3.5% at its facilities. that's beyond all comprehension. how can you have a deal with iran is continuing to enrich

their uranium is two facilities and to continue building centrifuges that can easily and quickly be enstaaled. you see at the end of the sex-month period, representative berkley writes, iran would be even closer to breakout capacity, meaning the ability to build a nuclear warhead so quickly that no one could mobilize forces in time to stop it. in other words, what we would have given iran last weekend is the luxury of time. time to develop a deadly nuclear weapon. it takes time for a nation, the united states, israel, the united kingdom, canada, any nation, it takes time for a nation to mobilize to come against a bad actor nation like iran in its development of a nuclear weapon. again, that's why this is so important. this chart that was created by senator mark kurt.

he accurately reported what the score will be for the world, iran -- we will get nothing, iran will get everything. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. mrs. bachmann: with that, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the chair will receive a message. the messenger: mr. speaker, a message from the senate. the secretary: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: madam secretary. the secretary: i haven directed by the senate to inform the house that the senate has agreed to s.con.res. 45 authorizing the use of emancipation hall for activities associated with the ceremony to award the congressional gold medal to native americans in which the concurrence of the shouse requested. the speaker pro tempore: under the speaker's announced spoil of january 3, 2013, the gentleman from colorado, mr. polis, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the

minority leader. mr. polis: thank you, mr. speaker. before i get to my remarks i want to briefly address the nuclear proliferation issue and iran, the gentlelady from minnesota as well as myself and the vast majority of members of this body have been supportive of crippling sanctions against iran and many of us believe that that has helped drive iran in the negotiating table. we hope for, of course, a peaceful outcome that takes nuclear weapons off the table and prevents iran from iquiring nuclear weapons and of course we continue to keep the use of force on the table if our diplomatic solution fails to be enacted that reaches president obama's objective, preventing iran from developing nuclear weapons. the issue has had strong bipartisan support, nearly unanimous, here in this chamber, with regard to continuing the pressure on iran to rejoin the responsible nations and renounce the

acquisition of nuclear weapons. but i'm here today to talk about something closer to home, mr. speaker. in fact, at home, mr. speaker, namely, the need to act on immigration reform. it's been 138 days since the senate passed a commonsense, bipartisan immigration reform bill. i was proud to be part of a bipartisan group of members here in the house that introduced h.r. 15, the companion bill to the senate's immigration reform bill that makes additional improvements for outcome-based border enforcement. and would address our broken immigration system and replace it with one that reflect ours values as americans, helps create jobs here at home, reduces our deficit by over $100 billion, and restores the rule of law here in our country which is currently being undermined by the presence of 10 million, 15 million, eight million, nobody knows how many people who are here illegally.

the issue will not resolve itself, mr. speaker. i call upon this body to act immediately and bring to the floor h.r. 15 and pass coomp rehencive immigration reform. later -- and pass comprehensive immigration reforl. later on in my remarks, given that this is the week of veterans day, i'll be talking about the contributions that many members of our military have made bhor from immigrant backgrounds, including the talent our military is missing out on today, including daca, or deferred action recipients who are able to work legally in our country but not serve in our military. this bill would solve that issue. my colleague, mr. tonko, from new york, is here and i'd be happy to yield to him. mr. tonko: thank you, mr. speaker, thank you, representative polis for bringing us together for what i believe is a very thoughtful discussion about immigration

reform, where we are, by definition, a nation of immigrants. and i believe that the passion that is the luring card to america is the american dream. people for decades and centuries throughout the history of this nation have pursued that american dream with the opportunity to climb those economic ladders, those opportunities that present themselves in this country where we're emboldened by immigrants and certainly the military is no exception. and so tonight we'll be talking about the empowerment that comes with h.r. 15, which is a very thoughtful piece of legislation. i am a co-sponsor on this legislation and i believe it's important for taos follow suit that the bipartisan spirit in the senate has already initiated. the opportunities for us to

allow for some suggest 11 million , if not more, immigrants to pursue that path to citizenship is an empowerment tool. it's great for our economic recovery, as was mentioned by representative polis, it provides for a great debt into our deficit. it allows for us over the 20 years to come to experience tens of billions of reduction in the deficit which is no short feat to be ignored. it is important for us to understand the economic vitality that sound immigration reform produces for this nation. we are indeed -- in need of many of the skill sets our immigrants bring you talk to the agriculture industry and those skill set are there talk to the medical industry. talk to the manufacturing industry, many immigrants are

assuming those roles. it's important. we look at the tremendous history in this nation, the military, the empowerment that came to this nation, that comes to this nation as we speak, they are our daughters and sons on the battlefield protecting our liberties, promoting our freedoms in this nation, to freedom-loving nations around the world. there has been an awesome specter within that military force that either is immigrants or those who are residing in this country and are not yet united states citizens. they have made a statement in the military history of this nation, they've made a very strong statement of support of this nation and all for which ste she stands. they have defended the banner that united states us, the -- that unites us, the united states flag. and they have certainly made their wark. as -- their mark. as of 2009, i'm informed that there's some 114,000-plus foreign-born individuals

serving in the military. 12% of them were not even united states citizens. so it makes a very powerful statement. i'm a grandson of immigrants. my grandfather, william tonko, served in world war i. i'm proud of that history that he helped to write. and he did that as an immigrant coming to this nation, understanding that as he left poland that there would be this american dream he could pursue. and my colleague made mention of the dreams. a tremendous bit of nomenclature we put on to people who were born here, perhaps, or came as youngsters and are denied opportunities. we have within the context of h.r. 15, the opportunity to empower dreamers. they are allowed with certain programming now that we have with the deferred action for childhood arrivals work that program they're enabled to perhaps get a reprieve from deportation or to be able to

secure a work permit but cannot serve in this nation's military. h.r. 15 would empower the dreamers, people who know no other country, who have been raised here, and want to serve but cannot. and so there are great improvements made in h.r. 15 and i'm proud to stand here with my colleagues who will speak in support of h.r. 15. it, i believe, provides a shot in the arm for our economic recovery, provides a military strength that's been proven throughout our history. 0% of all medal of honor recipients have been immigrant service members. the track record is there. the data are speaking to the empowerment that comes to the military with those who have that passion, that passion of emdwants, that pgs of naturalized citizens, that whole effort of those who are looking to be naturalized, believing in this nation, and all for which she stands is a tremendous statement of who we are as a nation and our

definition as a clustering of immigrants with a quiltwork of americana that allows for the economic climb, the ladders of opportunity called the american dream that is the passion that feels their hearts and souls and they have given to this military, they have given to the fight for freedom, they have given to the fight to protect our liberties and h.r. 15 goes a long way to recognize that and further strengthen this nation and so i am happy to join my colleagues tonight in support of h.r. 15. mr. polis: i thank the gentleman for from new york for his leadership on the immigration reform issue and his impassioned words. we also have with us this evening one of the original co-sponsors of h.r. 15, a leader on immigration reform, . e gentlelady from washington >> thank you, this is an important moment for immigration reform. my district is representative of why we have w need reform.

we have a northern border and a ch economy -- rich agricultural economy. in the southern part of my district we have some of the world's biggest companies including biotech and software and countless startupful. fixing our immigration system must be a top priority or our economy. whether it's ultra sound manufacturer who needs an engineer, companies in my district are in need of specialized high tech workers. we have to make sure that foreign students who graduate here can stay here to start new companies or support more research to lead to breakthroughs in other areas. farmers need immigration reform to find a stable, skilled, reliable work force to help us grow our food and our economy. that's why i helped lead the introduction of h.r. 15.

ms. delbene: this is a bipartisan bill with 190 co-sponsors and in light of veterans day earlier this week i can think of no better way to honor our active duty service members who are immigrants. currently there are more than 65,000 immigrants or 5% of the orce, than by taking action >> there are many dreamers brought here as children and undocumented, who want to serve their country but cannot do so. the military can only enlist people who have legal status. the program that we talked about earlier that the administration announced last year, allows many dreamers to apply for a two-year reprieve from deportation and work permit but does not confer legal status which means recipients are inell i believe to serve. the american people want our immigration system fixed and tired of congressional inaction.

the time to act is now and i ask my colleagues to act as quickly as possible. mr. polis: i thank the gentlelady for her leadership. this body's continual refusal to act on immigration reform sadly comes at a tremendous cost to our country and to our security as a nation. the financial costs, according to the c.b.o., it's estimated the senate bill would reduce our deficit by over $135 billion. grow millions of new jobs and boost our economy. in fact, in the four months since the senate bill was passed, we have already missed over $5 billion in revenue and tens of thousands of jobs. jobs that americans could use that have not been created, that don't exist today because of this body's failure to act. in the spirit of veterans day, highlighting the tradition of

military service that the gentleman from new york and the gentlelady from washington talked about and in a time when the military is facing recruitment issues, making sure we have the very best men and women to wear our uniform and defend our nation, many individuals who fall under the deferred action program are not allowed to serve. we are talking about dreamers, young people who grew up here, know no other country, many of them want to give back, want to risk their life to protect their country, the only country that they know, the country that they love. and yet the military is not allowed to recruit them and not allowed to serve. it estimated more than 30,000 young immigrants would join the military and qualify for legal status if we pass comprehensive immigration reform. key provisions of h.r. 15 would have important and lasting benefits for our armed forces

and broad support from the military. freck, the bill would allow deferred childhood arrivals to enlist, including the national guard and expedited path to citizenship in recognition to their service to our great nation. many immigrant service members have become great soldiers. until 2009, only citizens and permanent residents were allowed to serve. in 2009, the department of defense introduced the military ack sessions program which allowed visa holders to enlist in the military and earn citizenship through their service. we are fortunate as a nation to have talented and hard-working immigrants who want to serve in the military. with this opportunity is largely restricted to advice ags to medical professionals and language experts. that improves the security of our country, it would be improved even more by passing h.r. 15 to benefit from the

great potential and the tens of thousands of would-be service members who are asking to give back to our country, who are asking to put their lives on the line to defend the country they love, the country they know, the country that they want to serve. millions of aspiring americans who want nothing more than to pay their fair share, who want nothing more than to give back to our country, to make our country stronger. it's time for us to find a way for dreamers, for hundreds of thousands of other talented people to pursue their dreams and the only country they know, whether their dreams take them to the front lines of combat defending our nation or to the front lines of competitive jobs in the private sector or other forms of public service. failure to take action only

perpetrates an underground conomy in which our nation fails. and reside -- immigrants already here, already in many cases working, already contributing members of the communities that they live in. it is simply a matter of formalizing that process and restoring the rule of law so that we have a legal way of facilitating the flow of immigrants to our country. i can reconcile that we are both a nation of immigrants and a nation of laws. those two values that we have as being ns, far from mutually exclusive. h.r. 15 honors that tradition.

more than 70% of the american people support comprehensive immigration reform. hat's why i'm confident that h.r. 15 would pass today, would pass tomorrow, would pass next week. i had the opportunity to ask, mr. goodlatte as well as the chair of the rules committee, mr. sessions yesterday in the rules committee, what the plan was for immigration reform, why we were bringing forth bills with regard to asbestos, a legitimate problem to be sure, a bill that passed this chamber before, a bill that will not likely be taken up by the senate, but a bill that comes in the judd of the judiciary committee. why are we spending days and days debating this bill rather than solving a problem of immigration reform? mr. speaker, i know there are victims of asbestos poisoning, but i can tell you honestly, i

haven't heard from any constituents who called my office begging congress to take up asbestos reform. it's an issue and we should deal witness. i hope there is a bipartisan approach, not one of my constituents last week, last month, last year, not one, called my office and said we demand action. we demand action on as bless toss reform. not -- asbestos reform. not one. thousands -- i never had thousands of people with the archbishop, my good friend from chicago, thousands packed a church for immigration reform. thousands packed a church for immigration reform. not one call, not one phone call, not one email, not one email, one minute, not one email say congress pass asbestos

reform. a thousand people in an afternoon, we had to close off promotion because it filled up so much, not to mention the thousands, the tens of thousands phone calls and letters saying solve this issue. solve this issue, congressman. solve this issue, congress. we don't like the fact that there are 10 million people here illegally. we don't like the fact that we dishonor the rule of law. i don't like the fact that my cousin might be deported, i don't like that. you know what, mr. speaker, when we consider how unpopular this congress is, no wonder, instead of acting on issues that americans care about, we are discussing issues that yes, we can discuss, of course, spend a day, spend two days. are they going anywhere, but

issues i haven't heard about. i certainly haven't had a church with thousands of people in my district calling for. and that's why we need to act. mr. tonko: if the gentleman would yield. representative from colorado speaks of the tremendous support out there in the american public to do immigration reform and it's easy to understand. it is explained by the deep-rooted sense of heritage in this nation, where many of us can identify with immigrant roots. and i believe that that is what drives the desire to have this reform put into place. now, we talk about the overwhelming polls for support for this effort. and we are halfway through this battle, because the senate has made a major statement with the measure they have brought forth, so we can meet that opportunity here in the house of representatives. but earlier, the gentleman from colorado talked about the

military strength that comes from immigrants and cited many of the facts that really speak favorably to the shot in the arm they give the military. we think of some of those unique skills that they bring to the military as the immigrant service members. we talk about the opportunity to pull upon their second language proficiency. very important for service to the military. there are greater cultural understandings, which is again, a benefit that is borne by the military because of immigrants or those looking sometime to be at ralized could join the -- naturalized. and the list goes on and on. wer attrition rates and so this is a powerful statement. and when we think about just the

heritage of this nation, when we think about that american quilt, there are so many patches brought together under one common banner of different cultures, of races, of nationalities that really make a statement of who we are. this is a natural move forward to have an immigration reform policy to have developed here this year in congress. mr. polis: i would ask the gentleman from new york, have you gotten more letters or calls about the need to take up asbestos reform or immigration reform? mr. tonko: we have had many, many requests to move with immigration reform. it's one of the greatest bits of requests that we get. mr. polis: when you say more or less that people act or asbestos reform? mr. tonko: you are absolutely right. these are justified issues to talk about. when it comes to immigration reform, people are saying let's

get this done. we have people who are developing great intellectual skills. we are not taking advantage of that and not incorporating them. we have people who are assisting the sgturl industry, the education industry, the medical health care industry, people need to fill these efforts with immigrant power that is available. it is great to join you on the floor. i yield back. i know there are many who want to speak their voice here because this is a very pertinent issue right now that reform is very much required and let's get it done. mr. polis: i have a letter to submit to the record from the evangelical table that i would like to put into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. polis: the evangelical immigration table and the faith-based community with strong support from the catholic church as well as from

evangelical churches across the spectrum have been strong supporters of immigration reform from the pews. the he van gel call round table, endorsed immigration reform that respects the god-given opportunity and respects the family, respects the rule of law, guarantees secure national borders, ensures fairness to taxpayers and establishes a path towards legal status and/or citizenship to those who qualify and those who wish to become permanent residents. h.r. 15 honors the values of evangelical leaders, catholic leaders, jewish leaders, muslim leaders, of americans across the faith spectrum in ensuring our values as americans and our values as people of faith are

reflected in their immigration system. i would like to yield to the original sponsor of h.r. 15, a leader in this house on the fight for immigration reform, the gentleman from florida, mr. garcia. mr. garcia: i would like to thank the gentleman from com. mr. speaker, every day, every day, thousands of americans risk their lives for our nation, despite the fact that our broken immigration system rips them apart, rips their families apart by detaining, deporting their mothers, fathers, siblings and spouses. n my home state of florida, the florida, a woman was deported while translating between the

police and her sister. her sister was reporting a case of domestic violence. instead of arresting her sister's assailant, rita was held without warrant, wasn't allowed to see a judge for zen days before being transfered to i.c.e. custody. this is the spouse of a veteran. of someone serving in the armed forces. no one deserves this treatment. surgeonly not someone who has faced the challenge of being a military spouse. our nation's veterans were willing to make the ultimate sacrifice to protect us, the least we can do is protect their families. at the same time, there are thousands of young people who would give anything to defend our country, the only country they've ever known.

while these individuals with green cards cannot serve in the military, because daca doesn't allow for it, they're willing to do it. yet we do not allow it. these kids are an asset to our nation. and it's simply bad policy to turn them away. since 2002, 90,000 military service members have become citizens. we should be welcoming them with open arms. all of those willing to fight and risk their lives for our great nation deserve that respect. this is an issue that underscores the urgency with which we must pass immigration reform. fixing our immigration system isn't about justice and fairness. it's about enhancing our national security and military

readiness. there are enough members in the house that understand the benefits of immigration reform. there are enough people who know that it benefits our nation's prosperity. and understand that if we will do this -- understand that we will do this inevitably but with every day that passes this problem gets bigger. the consequences of inaction become more costly this body needs to stop hiding behind empty promises and start doing the job we were sent here to do. we recognize the sacrifices of america's veterans. let's remember their loved ones who were left in the shadows. i want to remind my colleagues across the aisle that there's enough blame to go around. but here's what's clear. the democratic senate took up

comprehensive immigration reform and passed a bipartisan bill. this would not be the bill i would love. this would not be the bill that the gentleman from colorado or the gentleman from california or many of us -- we could write a better bill. yet we took up this bill and it got passed. the president said he would sign that bill. before this house, we have a bipartisan bill that has 190 signatures and if the speaker would allow it to come to the floor, it would pass. mr. speaker, we need you to yield here. you did it on hurricane sandy relief. you did it on the budget and fiscal crisis, you did it on vawa. it's time to do it now. let the will of this body happen. let us vote and we will vote it through. the consequences are grave, not only for our country, not only for the millions who suffer, not only for the veterans, not

only for their spouses and family, they are going to have great consequence for your party. the time has come to let this be voted on. we've been given an unprecedented opportunity fix our broken immigration system and make our nation stronger. now is the time to pass immigration reform. thank you and i yield back to the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: i thank the gentleman from miami for his impassioned words. it is rare in my experience here that more than 2/3 of the senate can agree to solve an issue. they always talk about can we reach the 60-vote threshold, there's only 54, 55 of one party, how do we get to 60? this was 68 votes. more than twerds of the united states senate, more than 70% of the american people, this house could act tomorrow and as you know, madam speaker, what many

americans wonder is if it could pass, why aren't we debating it? why aren't we discussing it? well this chamber is, what we spend our time on and the bills we debit are determined by the majority leader and the speaker and that's why we need their ability to bring these bills to the floor. bring these bills to the floor. and if people want to stand in opposition, let them be public with that. say they don't want to solve immigration reform, don't want to solve immigration. but i'm confident the votes exist today with support of more than a third of the republicans in the senate, i think the numbers would be similar here, i think it could be a quarter, could be a third, could be 20% of the republicans in this body would agrow that it's time to fix our broken immigration system. i yield to the gentleman from miami. mr. garcia: i want to agree with the swrelt from colorado, what is clear is there are enough votes to pass this. what is clear is if this comes

to the floor, this will pass. what is clear is that mr. cantor wants the bill to pass. what is clear is that much of the leadership on the republican side and what is clear is, there's probably been no bill with more broad support , probably since i've been in congress, probably since the gentleman from colorado got here, we not only have the chamber on -- chamber of commerce on one side, we have the afl-cio on the other side of the spectrum, we have the farmworkers and the growers, we have almost every sector, the religious sector, all of them looking for a solution. and there's only one man standing in the way of that and that is the speaker system of we ask, mr. speaker, yield to the will of this body. yield to the majority. yield to what's right for our nation. we demand a vote. the nation deserves a vote. our country deserves a vote. thank you and i yield back to the gentleman. mr. polis: i thank the gentleman from florida. it is not the desire, i don't

think, of any of us, of the democrats, of our leader, of our members, for this to be a political issue that one side is demonized on, that is used to generate political support. rather, we'd like to solve it. we would like this issue to go away. we would like to fix our broken immigration system. but if that doesn't happen, of course candidates are going to run on fixing it and the american people with overwhelming support will elect candidates who want to fix it. if members of this body won't lead, frankly, madam speaker, they'll need to get out of the way. whether by their choice or the people's choice. the americans are demanding action. i'd like to yield to the gentleman from california, a eader on immigration reform. >> i thank the gentleman for yielding time. immigration reform is a top

priority for our nation and rightly so. it will not only help our economy grow but help families stay together. so i was taken aback earlier today when speaker boehner said that republican -- the republican-controlled house has, and i quote, no intention of ever going to conference on the senate immigration bill, end quote. that is clearly at odds with what the american people want and what the american people need. i just want to recount a bit of my own history. mr. polis: would the gentleman yield for a moment? one way to honor the speaker's word and not go to congress would be to take up the senate immigration bill. perhaps we could callen the speaker to honor his word to not go to conference by bringing the bill before the body, a conference wouldn't be necessary. mr. takano: that's correct, bring it directly to the floor.

bring that bill directly to the floor and let the house work its will. the top exof our special order had to do with, you know, immigration reform and the military and veterans. i recount a very poignant part of my own family's history. all of my grandparents, both my parents, were interned during world war ii without trial in japanese american internment camps. despite this great injustice, many, many, many children of these immigrants, young men, volunteered for military service. they fought in the 100th infantry and 442nd. suffered some of the greatest casualties and were most recently awarded the congressional medal of honor for their service. these were young men who wanted to demonstrate their loyalty to this country and were given an opportunity to fight for our

country and i think it's tradge exthat young dreamers, the deferred action, are not allowed to serve the country that they love, the lang wamming of english has mainly been the language they speak they are culture they know is that of our country, america, -- ust like many of the just like the men of world war ii yen ration, japanese americans who fought for this country, in all-japanese american fighting units, i believe the children of imfrants today want that -- of immigrants today want that opportunity. over the past few months i have received hundreds of letters from residents in my district, letters from business owners, husbands, wives and perhaps most distressing children. one letter i received is from a about enager who wrote

her mother who was deported. she wrote, it will be hard to bring her back, she has four chern and we need her. another letter said my stepfather's mother difed heart problems so my father, he, had to go back to mexico to her funeral. he was there for a couple of days and when he tried to come home it was hard for him to come back over to california. it's been a while since we have seen him. my mom misses him terribly. she cries every time she talks to him on the phone. it's been two months since he left for mexico, which means he probably lost his job. he is the main provider for our family. this is very stressful and hard on my mom because she's not able to pay the bills. it is hard for us to support us and be strong at the same time. i hate to see her suffer and be sad all the time. families should not be ripped

apart like this. other families should not have to go through what my family is going through. end quote. these are letters from children, mr. speaker, children whose families are being ripped apart. i also received a letter from a wife and mother saying, quote, i myself am one of those many families that unfortunately have to go through this injustice my husband was deported on his way back to -- on his way to work three years ago. during these few days it has been hard for my 5-year-old daughter and me. the stress i go through every day is unhealthy and unfortunately my daughter has to go through it as well. my daughter really wants to be with her father and it really hurts to see her have to go through the situation, unquote. these are american families that we can help by passing immigration reform. the last letter i'd like to read is from one of the largest employers in my district. the blue banner company. a grower and shipper of california citrus.

they wrote to me and detailed the difficulties of a recent crop of theirs when they faced a 30% to 35% labor shortage. because of the labor shortage, less fruit was harvest fred the trees in a timely manner. because the fruit was harvested not at a peak time it was sent to be juiced ebb stead of sold fresh for eat big consumers. this resulted in a total loss of their growers of 3.4 -- of $3.4 million to $3.8 million. the letter goes on to say, we, california agriculture, desperately need a legal work force from which to hire, end quote. reforming our immigration system will help businesses such as blue banner by providing a work force that's ready and willing to work. let's pass immigration reform and help families stay together and help businesses obtain the workers they need. thank you and i yield back. pll polis: thank you, madam

speaker. we have here another -- mr. polis: thank you, madam speaker. we have here another leader from the great state of california, my friend from california, mr. cardenas. mr. cardenas: thank you for bringing together this spornt discussion on this floor of our nation's capitol. i think it's important, mr. speaker, for us to remind ourselves that the only thing that is stopping comprehensive immigration reform is the fact that, mr. speaker, the leadership of this house is unwilling to allow the vote to take place. . today i'm proud to join my colleagues to talk about the need for immigration reform. but more importantly the cost america bears as congress does nothing. we were sent to washington to solve our nation's problems but republican leadership has announce we are done and will not take up immigration reform this year. mr. speaker, it is november 13.

we are not done. we have six more weeks to work. just like all americans. why don't we just continue doing our job? members of our armed forces don't get the liberty to say when they are done. there are no vacations or time-outs for they will. they proudly wear the u.s. flag on their shoulder and continue to protect our freedoms, even when the leadership in our congress decides that they no longer want to work. as of june, 2009, for example, there were over 114,000 foreign-born individuals in our united states armed services. serving our country. over 95,000 of those individuals were naturalized u.s. citizens. they were not born in this country, but they went through the process to becoming citizens and serve our country proudly. more than 10,000 of those service members are not u.s.-born citizens. they stand on the frontlines

because they believe in what america stands for. let's get to work, pass comprehensive immigration reform, and earn the honor of their service. and their sacrifice. every day we await action on comprehensive immigration -- on a comprehensive immigration reform bill, millions of dollars in potential revenue is lost to americans in our country. our farms do not have a stable work force. far too maybe high-tech companies are short the workers they need to continue to innovate and grow american jobs. our schools attract the best and the brightest from around the world, but when they get their degrees and want to stay in this great country, they are sent away. not allowed to start businesses and hire american citizens. in all the full economic potential of undocument immigrants, as workers, taxpayers, consumers and entrepreneurs is being lost because they are unable to earn legal status. and when we grow the american

economy, we create more jobs for americans. as many in congress continue to deny the pressing need for comprehensive immigration reform, the broken u.s. immigration system continues to tear families apart while simultaneously draining the federal budget and robbing our american economy. talking about comprehensive immigration reform is not enough. it is time for democrats and republicans to vote together on this floor and pass a solution that will serve all of america. the time for reform is now. the system is broken and fixing it in an intelligent, bipartisan way is something that a majority of americans want. americans understand the deportation or even self-deportation is not an option. they support a pathway to citizenship, even more support a pathway to legal residency. the american people want this

solution. what the -- with the introduction of h.r. 15 in our house, a bipartisan bill for comprehensive immigration reform, we have reached a significant milestone for commonsense immigration reform. the bill is practical and fair and holds everyone accountable. the bill strengthens the borders, strength bes the economy, and provide -- strengthens the economy and provides a pathway to citizenship for people who have lived, worked and raised their families right here in the united states of america. we cannot wait any longer. it is time for speaker boehner to bring a comprehensive immigration reform bill to the floor of this house and let the will of the american people have its way. america deserves a solution. we are ready for a vote. it is time that our house do the will of the people, that we have a comprehensive immigration reform bill come to this floor and allow republicans and democrats to vote their

conscience and pass that bill. i yield back the balance of my time. mr. polis: i thank the gentleman from california. just to highlight how we can improve our security as a nation , and honor the tradition of contributions veterans have made to the security of our nation, by simply allowing young people, loyal to our country, who have lived here and it's the only country they know, who are able to work legally, simply allowing them if they choose to put their lives on the line for the country that they love. that will make us all safer, madam speaker. and it's part of h.r. 15 and comprehensive immigration reform. we have with us here another leader in the effort to fix our broken immigration system, the gentleman from a large district in texas that covers a lot of the border, my good friend, mr. gallego.

mr. gallego: i thank the gentleman from colorado for yielding and, madam speaker, thank you so much for the opportunity to speak. this past veterans day i had the opportunity to recognize and to thank those who served in the duty to defend our country. i and all of us i think who serve in this chamber have a duty to these veterans, to defend their needs here in the u.s. congress. and that would include the need for comprehensive immigration reform. i am very privileged to represent a portion of san antonio, texas. known as military city, u.s.a.

this past weekend at a veterans day ceremony, at fort sam houston national cemetery, there was a different aspect of that celebration for veterans. because this past weekend, as we honored veterans on veterans day at fort sam houston national cemetery, there was also at that same site, that same location, that same time a naturalization ceremony where 18 people, service members, were naturalized. ddie rivers, diafilos, lilly alexandra, at that chic , liams, koakubasoa, maria rena, larry, okena, mario,

marlon, betra, gabriel. all of these were involved in a veterans day naturalization ceremony. they came from dominica, ecuador, germany, guyana, honduras, the ivory coast, jamaica, kenya, mexico, sierra leone, trinidad and toe bagow, and syria. u see, each year about 8,000 noncitizens join the u.s. military. their sacrifices throughout history have been many. immigrants who served in the u.s. military are enlistees like lance corporal jose gutierrez who was the first u.s. serviceman killed in combat in

iraq, some 10 years ago. mr. gutierrez, who was a native of guatemala, arrived in the u.s. without documents at the age of 14. he received his u.s. citizenship posthumously, after his supreme sacrifice. others like alfred vazcon, who emerged from the war as high achievers, he was an undocument immigrant from mexico. he was assigned to fort sam houston for basic and specialist medical training. he was awarded the medal of honor during the vietnam war. he became a u.s. citizen and he later served as director of the united states selective service system. the list of stories of noncitizens who have serveded in the u.s. military is a very long list. enlistments by immigrants are

highest during times of war. at the end of the last decade, madam speaker, there were over 100,000 foreign-born individuals serving in various aspects, in various capacities, in our armed forces. that's why it is so important to recognize the contributions of immigration to our national security. on social media, through twitter and facebook, i made it known at i was at this ceremony on veterans day in san antonio. where not only where were honoring veterans, but there was this citizenship, naturalization ceremony at the same time. and there were many comments about how is this possible? well, it is and it has been. in the years since 9/11 and the wars in iraq and afghanistan, we

have in fact relied on immigrants in our military. since 2002, over 89,000 military service members have become u.s. citizens. immigrants in the military and other agencies critical to our national security have served as translators, for example. and through their understanding of local communities and through their understanding of local customs, they have helped collect intelligence which better protects americans, not nly at home but also abroad. unfortunately today the house leadership said that they would not consider immigration reform this year. and, frankly, that is a real tragedy. they said they wouldn't even consider looking at the senate bill as a starting point to negotiate. h.r. 15, of which i am a

co-sponsor, has 190 other co-sponsors. and 25 or so republicans who have vowed to support it. and thus the votes are there to pass immigration reform. in this time of excessive partisanship and excessive bickering, we have to find a way forward, to do the right thing for our country, for our kids and for our future. we have to figure out a way to succeed, even if we succeed sometimes in spite of ourselves. especially in today's political climate. so many of us here in the house, we repeatedly talk about our commitment to principles. our commitment to fighting for what we as individual members believe in. but the reality is that in a

house with 435 people and with 00 members of the senate, an all-or-nothing attitude many times produces nothing. and that all-or-nothing attitude ills immigration reform. all-or-nothing attitude, it produces nothing for children who have known no other home than the united states and are here through no fault of their own. it produces nothing of the estimated 7 -- $775 billion in revenue and $125 billion in payroll from immigrant-owned businesses. and it produces nothing of the $175 billion in deficit reduction in the first 10 years after immigration reform is enacted or another $700 billion in deficit reduction in the 10

years after that. immigrants are so important to our country in so many ways. we say it all the time. we say it all the time. urs is a nation of immigrants. immigration reform is critical to our economy, to our families and, yes, even to our national security. madam speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. mr. polis: thank you, madam speaker. i'm happy to yield to the gentleman from new york, mr. tonko. mr. tonko: thank you, representative polis. earlier tonight, when we started this hour, i made mention of how proud i am of my grandfather who . s an immigrant from poland and along with his military colleagues, the muscle of the military might of this nation.

and together they were able to help serve this nation so as to proclaim victory in the war that was to end all wars. but we know that that wasn't the case. but nonetheless, with that contribution to this country behind him, he returned home, he returned to build the life, he returned to build a family, he returned to build a community and he returned like all of our veterans to build a nation. why would we want to stop this pathway to progress? why would we want to stop this pathway to economic vitality? why would we want to stop this pathway to citizenship? you know, it's no wonder that so many from various perspectives have come forth imploring us in this house, imploring the republican leadership to set an agenda that includes immigration

reform. everyone, from the chamber of commerce to the farm bureau, from labor to the farm community , to the working families of this nation, to so maybe of the businesses who have asked for sound immigration reform, let's not stand in the way of progress. we only ask the republican majority in this house to set the tone. open to the discussion. because if it's brought to the floor, i'm convinced that we will recognize as representatives, as leaders of this nation the true definition of this nation. a land of immigrants. . with that, i yield back and thank representative polis for leading us in this discussion here this evening. mr. polis: i thank mr. tonko for his impassioned words in the spirit of veteran days, week this past monday was veterans day, honoring those who serve our nation this week. i'd like to share the stories of several immigrants who serve

in our armed forces. this is augustus, serves in colorado, the u.s. army world class athlete program at fort carson. proud to say that he won the marine corps marathon. and led the team to victory. he's a runner and has done remarkable times and ened up winning it an was fortunate to get the run done right before hurricane sandy impacted our nation. we're proud, of course, and i want to thank augustus miles for hiser is vess and being a role -- for his service and being a role model for our nation. one of the hats i wear in congress, i co-chair the u.s.-nepal caucus, i'm particularly proud to be able to share the story of seral, a fort bragg soldier from

kathmandu, nepal, selected as the 2012 soldier of the year. he came to the united states in 2007 from nepal, went to college in nebraska, joined the army in 2009, and was deployed in afghanistan. we should be proud of the contributions that our 2012 soldier of the year has made. himself an immigrant, an inspiration to all the men and women who serve, including those who were born in other nations. as many of you know, contestants for soldier of the year is a very rigorous competition. he's been promoted to sergeant since he began the competition and we are particularly proud, the announcement was made during the association of the united states army annual meeting in washington, d.c. there are many others, madam speaker, that we would like to

be able to share the story of, who want to lay down down their lives to defend our country and serve with distinction but under current law are prevented from serving in the armed forces even though under the deferred action program they're able to work, they're able to attend school in our country, and all ma many of them ask is to be able to risk their lives to defend the country they love, the country they know, the united states of america. h.r. 15 and the senate bill address this situation and would allow these brave young men and women to serve. it's time, madam speaker, it's time to bring this bill forward, it's time to have a simple yes or no vote, it's what the american people are demanding. the american people are not demanding that we spend our precious hours and days debating asbestos reform. the american people are not demanding we only work a dozen days before the end of the year here in onk. the american people are

demanding that we solve problems. more than 70% of the american people support comprehensive immigration reforl. it would improve the security of the nation, honor the service of our veterans, secure our borders, reflect our values, improve our economy, reduce the deficit and create jobs for americans. what's not to like. let's pass comprehensive immigration reform now. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2013, the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. gohmert, for 30mens. -- 30 minutes. mr. gohmert: thank you, madam speaker.

one thing becomes very clear from our study of history and that is that things that ations do have consequences. things we do individually have consequences and things we do as a nation have consequences. people s why some remember that on may 30, 2010, , re were six flotilla ships this is from u.n. releases a report into last year's raid, how events unfolded, dated 2 september, 2011, it points out that may 30, 2010, six flotilla ships leave cyprus for gaza in an attempt to break israel's naval blockade. the turkish cruise liner is

chartered by islam excharity i.h.h. and carries 581 of the 700 flotilla activists. and we know that didn't turn out so well. israel did have a legitimate right to blockade the gaza strip where -- to prevent more rockets, more munitions from being brought in to the gaza strip that was being used to fire on, kill, and terrorize israelis. but again, actions have consequences, and many remember the flotilla coming down and challenging the blockade and they were -- there were people who were killed, but if you go dated re's an article,

y 30, 2010, a sunday, but it points out, and this is an article from "the washington mes" entitled israel assails resolution on nuke weapons as flawed. it's talking about an agreement that president obama was trying to get done, a nonproliferation agreement, and the article points out that on friday, which is may 28, 2010, a u.s. delegation in new york voted to endorse a consensus document ending the 2010 review conference for the nonproliferation treaty that calls for a conference in 2012 to discuss a weapons -- a weapons of mass destruction-free zone in the mideast. the finaling to be yumet of the month-long review conference

calls on israel to joan the treaty and move -- a move that would rear israel to disclose and then give up its undeclared nuclear arsenalment this was viewed and discussed as being the first time in people's emory when the united states by and through its administration, the obama administration, had taken an act that was very adverse to israel in the international community and particularly in the u.n. normally we did not side with israel's enemies, but one of the lessons that i was taught by history professors at texas a nation's when enemies see that nation's

rongest ally pulling away, it's provocative. it often provokes action by that nation's enemies against it because they think their strongest ally is pulling away. some saw that in -- before the war in korea. they thought that the united states might have north korea beyond its sphere of influence. those kinds of things, those words, these actions, these boasts can be provocative system of two days after the united states sides with israel's enemies in demanding that israel disclose its nuclear weapons, the flotilla launches to challenge the blockade. isn't that amazing? just happens to be right after this administration sides with israel's enemies, here comes a challenge to israel's blockade

that was just trying to save israeli lives. well the reason that it's important to component these things out now is what's happening between the united states and iran as we leave israel out of the equation, even though it's israel that is considered to be the little satan and we're considered the great satan and israel is probably to be the first attack, if there is an attack, they're certainly the most vulnerable, and yet we leave our former friend israel out of the equation and it brings to mind a number of thing that was been happening during this administration that have caused the vast majority of people in israel, of israeli citizens, to

believe that this obama administration is not concerned about israel's best interests. and there are many who have been aware of scripture and it is often -- it has often been a guide in our relations with a el, and it's really such historically appropriate thing in this house of representatives, especially if we were down the hall in the former house chamber, now called statuary hall, where they used to hold church every sunday through most sundays during the 1800's. up until the late 1800's. the largest church congress fwation was in the house of representatives. and it was not considered to be violative of the constitution

because it didn't endorse a particular religion, it was considered nondenominational. but scripture was read regularly every week down the hall. thomas jefferson coined the phrase separation of church and state as being appropriate, didn't find it offended that notion. in fact at times would bring the marine band to play hymns. so it seemed appropriate when we talk about israel to talk about israel's roots because in genesis 12, this is a king james version, now the lord had said unto abram get thee out of thy country and from thy father's house unto a land i will show thee. i will bress thee and make thy name great. i bill bless them that bless

thee and curse them that curse thee and in thesal shal all -- and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed. so abram went to the land of canaan that later became israel just as god promised in these verses. it was no accident that just inutes after israel became a nation, the united states, through its president, harry truman, became the first nation in the world to recognize what was prophesied throughout the old testament about israel returning. after its absence. israel returned and harry ruthan -- truman made sure we were the first nation that recognized them as an independent nation. the u.n. voted unanimously,

because of the holocaust and over six million jews being killed, they wanted to ensure that another holocaust would never happen again. and that brought about israel being re-est tab learned in the land that -- re-est tab learned in part of then -- reestablished in part of the land they had possessed 3,000 years before. so it was deeply troubling in 2012 when -- and this is an article from "the washington post" david ignatius, is israel preparing to attack iran? because it's considered a betrayal of an ally to warn an ally enemies that that may take self-defensive action to prevent being attacked. and the united states and iran

including president obama have said repeatedly, he has promised an american-israeli gathering here at the convention center he will never allow iran to have nuclear weapons, that it is an exiss ten rble threat to israel. and it certainly is. . so, we've been hearing behind the scenes for a number of years that this administration was telling israeli leaders, don't you dare attack iran without our permission. we'll take care of this. we won't let them have nuclear weapons. and yet it's not the united states that is first threaten. the great say the be, the united states, in the eyes of leader in iran, not the iranian people, but iranian leaders, would get . ound to attacking us

ut first israel is threatened. so there was concern obviously here in washington, in the obama administration, that the reported threats to israel, not to defend themselves without our permission, even though no nation should ever need permission from another to defend itself, and even our president obama said out here at the convention center, to an american israeli group, and prime minister netanyahu remind me of our president's words and i went back and look them up. sure enough he said, israel must defend itself by itself. our president said that. and yet if we're not going to help israel defend itself, which is actually defending us as well , then shouldn't we avoid

jeopardizing israel's own self-defense? yet here's this article dated february 2, 2012, says, defense lotetary leon panetta has a on his minds these days, but cutting the defense budget to draw down the forces in afghanistan, but his biggest worry is the growing possibility that israel will attack iran over the next few months. panetta believes there's a strong likelihood that israel will strike iran in april, may or june, before iran enters what israelis described as a zone of immunity to commence building a nuclear bomb. very soon the israelis fear the iranians will have stored enough enriched uranium in deep underground facilities to make a weapon and only the united states could then stop the them militarily -- stop them

militarily. that is a betrayal of our ally israel. that is a gross betrayal of our ally israel. we're supposed to be on the same side. and if israel defends themselves, it's defending us as well. whether we recognize it or not. that was a betrayal of israel. to leak what we believed, what this administration believed was their plans to defend itself. if we're not going to defend ourselves, for heaven's sake, at least allow israel to do it without putting them more in jeopardy. so by leaking that, obviously it was this administration saying to israel, well, you better not go when you were thinking you were going to go, because they're going to be ready because we warned your enemy for you. so we get to may.

and obviously the window that israel may have been considering attacking had to pass because of the leak by our own administration to israel's enemies through "the washington post." an intentional leak. then we get -- well, this is from march 29 of 2012. israelis suspect obama media leaks to prevent strike on iran by alexander marcot from abc news. two reports today about iran's nuclear program and the possibility of an israeli military strike have analysts in israel accusing the obama administration of leaking information to pressure israel not to bomb iran and for iran to reach a compromise in upcoming

nuclear talks. that is simply outrageous. this article says, continuing that same article, the first report informed policy quotes, unanimous israeli officials saying israel has been given cess to airbases by iran's azerbaijan, from which israel could launch air strikes and search and rescue aircraft. the article goes on, quote, it seems like a bibig campaign to , vent israel from attacking the analyst at the institute for national security studies told abc news. quote, i think the obama administration is really worried jerusalem will attack and attack soon. they're trying hard to prevent it in so many ways. the foreign policy report by mark perry quotes an intelligence officer saying, quote, we're watching what iran

does, closely, but we're now watching what israel is doing and azerbaijan and we're not happy about it, unquote. further down, in recent weeks the obama administration shifted from persuasion efforts vis-a-vis decision makers in israel's public opinion to a practical, targeted assassination of potential sraeli operations in iran. quote, the campaign's aims are fully operational. to make it more difficult for israeli decision makers to order the israeli defense forses to -- forces to carry out a strike. and what's even greater -- graver to erode the idea of its capacity to launch such strike with minimal casualties. we're putting israel's own forces at far greater risk for

casualties. is that something that an ally does to a friend? some of us believe that the bible is accurate. certainly been so many prophecies fulfilled. and if that's true this administration, unless they can find a verse that accurately says that those who betray israel will be blessed, then this country is being dug a deeper hole by this administration and its betrayals of israel's trust an israel's friendship -- and israel's friendship. then this is from november 3, 013, of this year. from the blade of fury, scandalous israeli -- israel -- bitter protest to obama administration over reported

white house security leak. this says, the israeli government conveyed, quote, bitter protest, unquote, to the white house this week over the obama administration's reported leak of who is behind last week's air raid on a syrian base near the port city. words being used by the media and officials speaking unanimously in israel to describe what they perceive as a breach in trust on the part of the united states include fury, scandalous, baffled, unthinkable. this administration continues to betray our friends, our ally israel. other things that have happened in the past, were comments made by president obama to president sarkozy in 2011 at a g-20 summit, which were belittling israeliple benjamin netanyahu. comments in 2012 that israel should return to its 1967

borders, that would have subjected it to relentless attacks and vulnerability were not helpful to our friend and ally. the obama administration's mpare to israelis building settlements yet criticizing israeli housing plans for east jerusalem. the obama administration's decision to eradicate the missile defense programs that would have helped israel as well as the united states. leaving prime minister netanyahu in 2010 for over an hour in the white house meeting room while president obama dined with his family and refused to take a picture with him was not a friendly gesture. secretary of state hillary clinton announced the obama administration planned to send 147 -- $147 million to the west bank and hamas-run gaza. president obama stated that all his, quote, friends in chicago were jewish, unquote, and says he was sometimes being accused

of being a jewish puppet. the obama administration leaked to the "the washington post" of the time window in which israel would take out iran's nuclear program. the obama administration leaked to the media that israel was going to use the azerbaijan air space to take out iran's nuclear program. we placed immense pressure on israel not to defend itself without the united states permission. -- united states' permission. the obama administration has never condemned the racest, hateful teachings about jewish people going on in palestinian schools in the middle east. and in some muslim schools in the united states. president obama traveled to turkey, iraq, saudi arabia and egypt and apologized to them on behalf of the united states. obama administration's support for the muslim brotherhood to rise to power in egypt, as well as throughout the middle east, though the muslim brotherhood had never backed away from their

demand for a nonexistence of israel. the obama administration continues to support the muslim brotherhood's return to power in egypt when egypt is whether the muslim brotherhood turned violent on morsi's arrest, because of the violation of the constitution that did not provide for impeachment, after the egyptian people turned out in the millions to demand his removal. it was not a coup as the christian pope in egypt told me. it was not a coup. this was a people rising you. and demanding removal. and yet this administration now has cut off support because egypt does not want the group, the muslim brotherhood that was killing christians, burning churches, terrorizing the nation, we want them back in charge. this administration does. it's an outrage.

though the syrian leader assad has been ruthless in killing and abusing his people, it has not been helpful to israel to the extent of the egyptian leader mubarak was, this administration has not done anything but put israel in more jeopardy by its actions in syria. so, we have not been terribly elpful to our friend israel. and it doesn't sound like we are actually blessing israel. it sounds like we are cursing , rael, belittling its leaders marginalizing its efforts to defend itself, which also inerrs to our benefit. my oath of office is to this country. when i was in the army for four years, my oath was to this country. my allegiance continues to this

country. and i believe that being israel's friend is helpful to this country and that's why i so strongly support being a friend to israel. and even if you took the bible completely out, you took out most anything except just looking at the middle east and who believes in the value of life like we do here in the united states, who believes more in democratic actions like we do in the united states, then israel should certainly be our friend. but what this administration is doing with iran is foolhardy. it is foolhardy. and thank god for france. they didn't wave a white flag of surrender. they said, this is a terrible deal. and thank goodness they slowed it down because this administration thinks they're just new and everything they try

will work perfectly. hello,obamacare. well, it doesn't work any better when they try to mess with our friendships and reward our nemies and hurt our friends. so, in the few minutes that are remaining, madam speaker, i'd like to reference back to "the new york times" article by barry james, october 21, 1994, during the clintonned administration. there was skepticism about the u.s.-north cry agreement -- north korea agreement said it could delay inspections. some politicians in south korea criticized the accord said they were afraid they bought