somewhat of an agreement here. we can all agree to the fact that until we have the science, we should be careful and cautious. one of the things about thc is because it has been illegal, we haven't really been doing the studies and research. some of the only data has become out recently as it has been legalized. evening casual users, there are profound changes in the brain. we have done a number of mri scans. studies showed a progressive decline in iq. even in early studies, we are starting to see problems and that is notwithstanding the of to 14% of fatal accidents involving thc.

we hear about medicinal marijuana and it's interesting that in the state of california and in the city of denver, we ine more pot dispensaries then we do starbucks. i don't know what your opinion is, but i don't think people are that unhealthy in denver in california. is there anyone on the panel that would disagree with that? again, i question. it interacts with what you do. do you treat someone who is on medicinal marijuana versus recreational marijuana any differently than when it comes to traffic accidents, when it comes to being able to fly an airplane, to engineer a train. anyou treat those people differently?

would anyone like to comment on that? yes, go ahead. not in the department of transportation. all safety sensitive employees are subject to the same testing and we did issue the two state ends. one in 2009 in response to the inicinal marijuana law and 2012 on recreational. everyone is to be treated the same. there is no legitimate medical explanation for a schedule one drug, marijuana. for all intents and purposes, if someone is sick and need marijuana, they are disabled for the purpose of having a job and transportation? >> if that person tests positive, they will be required to be removed from safety sensitive positions. i did not catch all of the exchange here, but i believe mr.

connolly brought up mr. ok' as all he such would require was just a regular driver's to be able to qualify toterms of safety standards fly an airplane. did i catch that right? were you talking about a different subject? >> is legislation to allow private violets to not have to have the medical examination that they are now required to have. theory, with that standard and even under the current standard, a private pilot could be flying an airplane under the influence of marijuana. that is possible and we have investigated accidents where that has occurred and we will have the meeting to get more specific about it. to watch documentaries on tv and i was watching one the other night that discussed

airplanes and midair collisions. what they focused on was private aircraft that had drifted in the wrong airplane and interacted .ith a certain aircraft i was living in the area at the time, san diego i believe 1978 where you had a private airplane that drifted in the wrong airspace and they collided with a commercial aircraft and hundreds died as a result. ist that would suggest to me no matter the highest dandridge do could ever come up with for a commercial pilot, when you have private pilots out there who could be impaired and not receive the same high standard, then they are in effect just as dangerous to the commercial passengers as the commercial pilot himself. if his standards were lowered as well. would you agree or disagree with that?

a private pilots flying with lower standards in effect has the same potential danger impact as if the pilot was a commercial and flak -- airplane was impaired instead. >> when we do accident investigation, the issue of impairments may be different. whether they had a medical certificate or not, we put that in the probable cause. the safety of aviation in general is no better than the lower standard for any pilot who's in the air. as we have pilots who, in this case, hopefully it will never make it into law but pilots flying with no more standard than having a drivers license and hopefully be certified to fly of course but no medical standard beyond that. then we have the legalization in the increased medicinalization

and decriminalization and i see the risk to air travel growing in the future. i would suggest, mr. chairman, that we look at this from both sides. one is the fact that there is many reasons that we should not go forward with legalization, or evenlization, decriminalization but have the highest standards for all who fly in the air realizing that there are new threats when it comes to thc. guidance are you getting from the white house? the president has been giving ambiguous cues on this. in 2011 he made clear statements that marijuana should not be legalized. it's a potential danger and young people should certainly stay away. other4, he made

statements suggesting it may be no worse than tobacco or alcohol. i would love to hear from you as government agencies what sort of guidance, if any, you are getting from the white house. we work closely with the white house office of national drug control policy. nationalpart of the drug strategy. the office has provided support for our roadside survey and for other research that we've done. i would say that we are getting very good import -- input and support. >> anyone else? say the same. we work with the national drug control policy and setting standards. the set policy and we do regulatory side.

we have worked well with them. >> have you been moved in any direction toward relaxed standards are legalization? >> we are under executive order test for under so to schedule one and scheduled two drugs and that will remain. you, mr. chairman. a very interesting discussion. thank you to the panel. >> didn't the president, after he made his statement saying it was no worse than alcohol or tobacco, we did have test actation -- we did have testimony that he disagreed with the white house. you would agree with ellen cp more than the president -- you would agree with oncp? >> we investigate and -- [laughter] >> you did not commit yourself

on that. ondcp. workingw ith said?ncur with what they >> we are in agreement and we are in agreement with the president as well. >> oh, no, no. [laughter] nowuld make a funny comment but i won't. we may need to get the testing equipment out here. >> we work closely with them on everything and setting the standard. >> we hauled in the deputy director and he disagreed with wholeesident and we had a host of people, dea, other agencies who also disagreed with the resident. i tried to embarrass you but it didn't work.

dr. michael, you said it is the decision of the state, really. the federal government does cents in standard and we have standard. we can penalize you and that is an incentive. >> the congress established a statute. of thest read one offices that just recommended going to 0.5. is that right? >> i believe that was a recommendation. >> i knew one of you did but there's a recommendation. and we do assess penalties to where that don't comply there is some reduction in their eligibility for programs or funds. that was a recommendation? >> that was our recommendation, yes. don't have federal

standards. we have states adopting standards. colorado it is five nanograms per milliliter, i guess. is there any consideration of any standard under way other what the national standards board is considering? are you guys looking at anything? yes, we are. we recognize that we need more testing of drivers at the state level. >> and you need some means of testing. you said you are using some similar devices in testing. been is nothing that has as acceptable or certified. i'm sure you have not certified

anything yet. any piece of equipment that can test, correct? have inechnology you your hand is developing rapidly and we think this will improve testing. >> california you're doing some testing? >> pilot testing in four locations in california as we speak to test the feasibility of those with the idea that if they are working well encouraging the use by state. more testing, we believe -- >> is this internal or are you working with a national standards testing agency? are working with state officials on this. >> not with the winds setting the standard or at least looking at sending some standards which would be the national standards testing -- what are the initials? >> no, we are not working --

you think it would behoove to contact them. we will ask the committee to put you in touch with them. i've had my go around with them and they do take a while to develop a standard. it's a important and you need to be accurate in what you adopt as it does become a standard. i would suggest -- i do not do these hearings just to hear ourselves talk. we're trying to also stay ahead of the curve. we have dramatically changing laws that changes social behavior. marijuana when he went to college or something and this is much more powerful. we have had testimony that confirms this and we've got people more at risk. ,e have laws rapidly changing

societal view and then we talked about teens are most susceptible and vulnerable in the most my transportation, many of them by alcohol, some by substance abuse and we see increasing use of that among the most vulnerable now viewing this as less of a risk. we do have some serious issues here. no standards, no testing capability. we have done some testing in the 2007 and 2013. i want to see some data and i want to see others looking at beefing up the testing and the regulations where we now have more exposure to a schedule one

narcotic being more available to the public and the implications on public safety and transportation. that is something hopefully positive that can come from this. it is my understanding marijuana stays in the system longer than alcohol. we have a whole host of things that need to be looked down. again, implications from a different type of substance that it's posing risks. i've been on transportation for with somes institutional knowledge. one thing we focused on with transportation when you see people getting slaughtered by the tens of thousands per year, we did some simple things. rails and thed median. there were crossovers and we put

in the rumble strips so people who fall asleep are awakened or shaken alert. the safety airbags and the changes. if we do not do something when we see the danger of a new narcotic, again the potential of more people impaired, driving , ale impaired weather, again ,ehicle manning a train piloting. i showed just a few samples of the civil claims that went down. we have pages and pages and i showed four. i showed one picture of a teenage fatality we know from the blood test that people says

no one gets killed from smoking marijuana. differ that. we have serious responsibility and i intend to pursue the matter beyond even this hearing so i thank each of you for coming out, for being part of today's hearing. hopefully we can all do a better job and there being no further business, with the concurrence of the minority, we will leave the record open for 10 additional days. we may have additional questions and i've asked for additional information to be submitted for the record. without objection, so ordered. no further business before the government operations subcommittee, this hearing is adjourned. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

>> for over 30 five years, c-span brings public affairs events from washington directly to you putting him in the room at congressional hearings, white house events, briefings, conferences and offering complete gavel-to-gavel coverage of the u.s. house all as a public service of private industry. c-span3 did by the cable tv industry and brought to you by your local cable and satellite provider. watch us in hd, like us on facebook, follow us on twitter. on a borderate security spending bill that was eventually pulled for consideration by gop leaders. the un security council meets on the israeli-palestinian conflict. and after that, the atlantic council hears from former palestinian prime minister.

on the next "washington journal," our first guest is author and columnist dave schapiro discussing -- venture. or the lawsuit against president obama and how they are using impeachment as a talking point. nortone eleanor holmes will take questions as they head into august recess and joined by founder of the group architects and engineers for 9/11 truth. washington journal is live on c-span everyday at 7:00 a.m. eastern join the conversation on facebook and on twitter. likes this weekend, book tv and american history tv take you on a trip for various locales we discovered during your cities tour including bellingham, washington, and the oyster

industry of olympia. r&b music as well as the restoration of this fighter. see the laboratories and hear the voices of the mormon tabernacle. saturday at noon eastern on c-span 2 possible tv. and on american history on c-span 3. >> and on what was scheduled to be the last legislative day before august recess, house leaders pulled from the floor a emergencyon spending bill when it became apparent they did not have the votes needed and the gop conference met for more than an hour and a half. later, the rules committee approved a rule allowing consideration before september 5. the gop conference meet again friday at 9:00 a.m. eastern with the house in at 10:00. debate began midday and lasted nearly an hour and a half.

objection. mr. rogers: madam speaker, i yield myself six months. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for six minutes. mr. rogers: i rise today to present h.r. 5230, which provides immediate short-term funding to address the southwest border crisis. in total this bill provides $659 million to meet urgent border security and humanitarian needs for this fiscal year ending on september 30. thousands of illegal immigrants, including unaccompanied children, have flooded our borders and overwhelmed our current facilities and personnel this includes a staggering number of children arriving with no family, who are being smuggled across our borders by criminal organizations.

subject to abuse and violence. we need to put safeguards in place to prevent them from taking this dangerous squour nee , as well as provide the resources needed to take care of them and process them appropriately. the president must take the lead on this. by mitigating the crisis. turning back the tide of illegal immigrants, and fully enforcing our laws. this problem has, without a doubt, been exacerbated by the administration's policies on immigration and it's up to the administration to find a way to fix that problem. in the meantime, however, madam speaker, it's plain that something must be done to ensure that our law enforcement personnel and federal agencies

have the resources needed to deal with this dire situation in the short term. the $659 million in funding in this bill focuses on three areas. one, border security. two, humanitarian assistance. nd prevention. to meet the most pressing needs. out of the toal $659 million, $262 million is provided to increase security and enforce our laws. boosting personnel and increase degree e-- detention space to the largest capacity in our history. part of this funding will help accelerate judicial proceedings by increasing the number of temporary judges and outfitting all immigration courtrooms in the nation with teleconferencing

equipment that would allow them to be able to join in the process of adjudicating those cases on the border. there are some 332 of those courtrooms around the country. and we've doubled existing funding for the national guard to bolster their presence along our border as they assist customs and border protection with surveillance, investigations, and humanitarian efforts. the bill also provides $197 million to take care of these unaccompanied children. ensuring they have proper housing, meals, and temporary care while they are in u.s. custody. third, madam speaker, to stave off the continued influx of illegal immigration, the bill redirects existing state department funding to ensure that countries like guatemala,

honduras and el salvador must quickly accept and repatriate these returning from the u.s. this bill draws a hard line on spending, scrubbing the president's request to the couse -- focus on the most immediate needs. it does not include funding for longer term needs or unnecessary programs like cash subsidies for coffee farmers. any additional funding for this crisis can and should be addressed under the regular appropriations process for fiscal year 2015. in addition to make sure that this bill doesn't add a penny to , we make sure there's offset using prior year funds. lastly the bill includes several policy provisions recommended by

the speaker's working group on .he border crisis representative kay granger of texas will speak soon. this includes changes in a 2008 law to make sure all unaccompanied minors arriving in this clint are treated the same, mexicans and canadians and all will be treated equally. -- it gthens the law prohibits secretaries of interior and agriculture from restricting customs and border protection activities on federal and on the border.

address of the most immediate needs on the border. it also puts in place much-needed policy changes that should stop the flow of unaccompanied children who are being put at risk during their long dangerous journey through mexico. it's our congressional duty to quickly pass this bill in short order and therefore i ask all members to support it. i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kentucky reserves. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. >> madam speaker, i rise today to oppose this bill that sadly falls short in too many ways. mrs. lowey: the key federal agencies tasked with responding to the humanitarian crisis on our borders are dangerously

close to running out of money. these unanticipated costs are affecting the core functions at the department of homeland security and health and human services. and although the bill includes funding to hire additional immigration judicial teams and help set up new repatriation centers in central america, the amounts provided are insufficient. the justice department and the state department will not be able to handle their duties without significantly more resources. all four departments need more funding than this bill provides, and few are partisan immigration policy riders than this bill now contains. our majority unwisely included legislative language to make sweeping changes to current law related to due process and immigration proceedings. controversial legislation

hastily added to an emergency supplemental is not the way to address a complicated problem. on july 8, the president requested $3.7 billion in emergency funding. the bill provides less than $700 million. the president requested funding through fiscal year 2015. this bill barely covers the remaining weeks in f.y. 2014, setting this house up to do this all over again in september. the president's request also sought emergency funding to combat a dangerous wildfire season. as of monday, the forest service reported 26 large uncontained wildfires burning in eight states. as a member from new york, our region devastated by hurricane sandy, i'm acutely aware how

important it is for the federal government to provide a robust response. with the house adjourning today , federal agencies will be left to fight august fires without ore funds. this bill fails to procure more iron dome interceptors for israel as requested. hamas has used the ongoing crisis in israel and gaza as an accuse to launch thousands of rockets at israeli cities and towns. the iron dome missile defense system has proven highly effective at neutralizing the rockets. in addition to not funding important priorities, the majority offsets the funding that is provided to cuts to other programs. we should provide emergency funds in a crisis situation.

lastly, i strongly object to the majority's significant policy changes to existing law without any hearings or markups. 3/4, 3/4 of this appropriations bill is straight authorizing legislation. clearly many factors led these desperate parents to hand off their children to complete strangers with the hope to make their way to safety here. we ought to consider the complicated policy questions and provide a carefully considered solution. yet, these policy changes reveal a knee jerk response, coupled with another bill to deport children who are already in the u.s. in addition to emergency appropriations, we should consider bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform passed by the senate

over one year ago. which could have helped to prevent the current humanitarian crisis along our southwest border by increasing border security personnel and nearly doubling the number of immigration judges. the two measures we will consider today are deeply disappointing. mr. speaker, madam speaker, we should provide sufficient funding to cash-strapped agencies and without the baggage of controversial immigration policy riders. i regret we will not do that with this bill and i regret even more the consequences of our failure. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from new york reserves her time. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. rogers: madam speaker, i yield five minutes to the

gentlelady from texas, kay granger, who is the chairman of the foreign operations subcommittee on appropriations, but more importantly here, accepted the responsibility of the speaker to put together a task force to investigate the problem on the border and to recommend collusions and she has, with great success. so let me recognize, or yield five minutes to the gentlelady from texas, kay granger. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from texas is recognized for five minutes. mr. ranger: thank you, chairman. for yielding. madam speaker, as we speak, unaccompanied minors continue to be sent from central america through drug cartel smuggling networks across mexico and through our southern border. families are being lied to and manipulated by the coyotes. the $6,000 their families spend

to send their children to the united states go into the bank account of the most powerful drug cartels in the world. since october, over 58,000 unaccompanied children have made the dangerous journey to the united states and many more will continue to come unless we send a clear message that they will not be allowed to stay in the united states. i have seen firsthand the crisis that's unfolded on the southern border in places like the rio grande valley in south texas. i've seen the women and children sleeping on the floor of a bus station in laredo. i've seen motherless infants being cared for by my straminger who is around and i've seen the children who are alone in detention facilities in mcallen, texas, and i've seen the 1rks200 children being sheltered at lackland air force base in san antonio. most disturbing of all, i've heard the stories about the most god-awful journey anyone should ever have to experience.

we're here today because we have a responsibility to stop this crisis. the president has failed to lead, so i firmly believe this chamber must act. doing nothing is not an option. since june when the speaker asked me to lead a working group to provide policy recommendations on what we can do to address the crisis, i've been to the texas-mexico border twice and led a co-dell to guatemala and honduras to see where the children are coming from and why. i'll be returning to the border tomorrow for a third time the members of the working group dove head first into this issue to understand this crisis and provide recommendations for short-term, immediate response. the policies we reck mened are not an attempt for immigration reform, they are serious solutions to address this crisis. i want to take a moment to recognize the -- recognize the hard work of the members of the working group who made policy

recommendations to the conference and the expertise they brought to the table. i want to thank the chairman of the judiciary committee bob goodlatte, chairman of the homeland security committee, mike mccall, chairman of the homeland security committee, john carter, chairman of the western hemisphere foreign affairs subcommittee, matt salmon, congressman pearce from the financial services committee and congressman mario diaz-balart from the appropriations committee. one of our conclusions is that congress should not provide more resources to the administration without changing the policies that have led us to the situation we're in today. administration officials and officials in the central american countries have always said we have to make changes to the trafficking victims protection re-authorization act of 2008. a month ago, it appeared there was a bipartisan consensus forming on this issue. white house press secretary josh ernest said from the white house

podium just three weeks ago when discussing changes to the 2008 law, that is, quote, a priority of this administration and if you listen to the public comments of democrats and republicans, it sounds like it's a bipartisan priority. i agree. and it's disappointing that the white house has backed down from their original statement on how we can immediately address this issue. we're not asking for repeal of this law. we are saying we need to tweak the 2008 law so that all eunaccompanied minors are treated the same as mexican and canadian children for removal purposes. the policy changes included in this bill ensure that children receive a prompt hearing within seven days after they're detained and require that a judge rules no later than 72 hours after a hearing. accelerating the hearing times requires more judges. i thank the chairman for including the necessary funding to hire 40 temporary judges

until this crisis is under control. for prepay -- for repatriation we're prioritizing last in, first out. the last child to go into custody will be the first ones we send home. after families have spent between $6,000 and $9,000 to send their children here, this will send a strong message to the families and the countries -- in the countries of origin that their children will not be permitted to stay. this is a message of deterrence. i also note that chairman rogers has prioritized funding for central american countries to safely and humanely return these children. working with these countries, as we return their children, as they have asked us to do. with a surge of children, there's been an increased pressure on customs and border protection officials this supplemental deploys the national guard to assist high traffic states and will free up the border patrol to focus on their mission.

mr. rogers: i yield the gentlelady one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. granger: we include a provision to allow border patrol unfettered access to federal lands. right now through a memorandum of understanding, border patrol officials are only allowed to pursue those into federal lands, they can't do regular patrols. and finally, the supplemental requires a sense of congress that children should not be detained at military bases. while this will not change the law, this provision addresses a serious and growing concern from members of congress, not least of the concerns is that children should not be stored on military bases. the congressional budget office has given the assessment of policy changes in this bill. they said that because the legislation allows for the children to self-deport, it will lead to immediate savings. this is a smart targeted bill that addresses the crisis

immediately. i urge my colleagues to vote yes on the supplemental and show the american people that we're going to end this crisis. i thank you, mr. chairman, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the gentleman from kentucky reserves. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. mrs. lowey: madam speaker, i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the gentlelady from connecticut, the distinguished ranking member of the labor, health, human services subcommittee on appropriations. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from connecticut is recognized for two minutes. ms. delauro: madam speaker, i must rise in opposition against this irresponsible and insufficient border supplemental. for months democrats have urged this majority to pass comprehensive immigration reform. the bill that was passed in the bipartisan basis in the united states senate, reforms that reflects our values and the country that we want to be, one with strong enforcement at the border, deportation of dangerous criminals and a path

to citizenship that protects workers, helps families reunite and clears backlogs. but this republican majority has done nothing. they have refused to act, and my colleague from texas is right. doing nothing is not an option. and now we face a humanitarian crisis on our border that demands an immediate response. the majority's answer is just send children who enter our ountry alone, send them home regardless of the violence and the imminent danger that they face. this bill only includes $197 million for providing shelter and care for these refugee children. and while these kids are here, we have a moral and, yes, we have a legal responsibility to provide for their housing, care and processing in the most cost-effective way possible. this insufficient amount will

mean that h.h.s. will have to make up the difference through high-priced short-term contracts. that will cost us more in the long run and it could result in cuts to other priorities like education, health, medical research and job training. if congress tries to make up these shortfalls elsewhere, this is not responsible leadership. our policy, signed into law by president george w. bush, provides for appropriate screening of those who may be victims of trafficking and that rightly includes unaccompanied children. this supplemental appropriation would change this policy and almost certainly result in children being returned to the violence that they are desperately trying to escape. america can do and should do better. we should help protect those kids who are in serious danger and push the leaders of these nations to address the root causes of why so many of their citizens are fleeing. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. ms. delauro: and we should pass

comprehensive immigration reform. it is time for leadership from this republican majority. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. rogers: madam speaker, i yield three minutes to the chairman of the appropriations subcommittee on homeland security, the gentleman from texas, mr. carter. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for three minutes. mr. carter: thank you, mr. chairman. madam speaker, it is a proven fact that lawlessness breeds lawlessness, and sadly i believe this assertion sums up an issue that is confronting us today. thanks to the large part to the president's political decision to not enforce our immigration laws, a chaotic situationes that erupted into a national security crisis and a law enforcement nightmare along the border. we all know the facts. an estimated 90,000 unaccompanied alien children

are estimated to cross into south texas rio grande valley by the end of this fiscal year. another 145,000 children are estimated to flood the border in fiscal year 2015, and these figures do not include tens of thousands of families that will also surge across our border over the same period of time. as the result of this influx, our brave border patrol agents, c.b.p. officers and i.c.e. agents are spending countless hours caring for children rather than focusing on their primary enforcement missions. this will be tragic if it weren't so preventable. mr. speaker, we do not have -- madam speaker, we do not have an open border policy in this country. as we tragically learned in 9/11, border security and the integrity of our immigration system, that truly matters to our nation's security and the

rule of law. so today we offer a strong but initial step to provide both the right tools and the right authorities to address and deter this seemingly unending influence of illegal -- influx of illegal aliens. included in this package is $405 million completely offset from recovered funds for the department of homeland security , funds that will enable c.b.p. and i.c.e. to enforce our laws and apprehend, detain and deport illegal aliens. perhaps more importantly, mr. speaker, this -- madam speaker, this bill fully funds the administration's realization that detention is in fact a necessary deterrent to illegal immigration. the president requested funds to fully support the long mandated annual bill capacity -- bed capacity, a complete reversal from his budget request in which he proposed

instead to reduce detention beds by nearly 10%. the president has also retracted his policy on the detention of families who illegally cross the border. this bill provides funding through the end of fiscal year to support 34,800 detention beds and an additional 6,320 family detention beds, a total of over 41,100 detention beds to enable the necessary consequence management for breaking the law. and lastly, mr. speaker, this bill includes policy changes to bring reform and parity to the adjudication and repryation of -- repatriation of these children. madam speaker, we must act and we must act now. lawlessness breeds lawlessness and we must act to stop it and secure our borders. i urge my colleagues to support this strong bill and i yield

back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. mrs. lowey: madam speaker, i am pleased to yield four minutes to the gentleman from north carolina, mr. price, the ranking member of the homeland security subcommittee of appropriations. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina is recognized for four minutes. mr. price: madam speaker, i rise in strong opposition to this misconceived and underresourced legislation. for a while it looked like we might do better than this. as the ranking member of the homeland security appropriations subcommittee i was pleased to take part in a delegation to guatemala and honduras, ably led by chairman kay granger. but as successive versions of the republican bill have surfaced over the past two weeks, an apparent request for votes only among republicans, they reflected less and less of what we learned on that trip. the bill under consideration provides less than $1 billion for the departments of homeland

security, health and human services, justice and state, far below the president's request, what is being considered by the senate or what is required to deal with the crisis on our borders and beyond. the bill only provides funding for anticipated needs for the remainder of this fiscal year, a mere two months. now, i would object to that less if the majority had any plans for actually completing our appropriations bills before the end of september, but we all know that they do not. instead, for the first time since the creation of the department of homeland security, our homeland security appropriations bill is not even going to the house floor. the approach taken in this legislation shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the issue before us. this isn't a border security crisis. this is a humanitarian crisis. we don't need to deploy the national guard or surge our border capacity because we're not failing to catch individuals as they cross. in fact, these young people are

turning themselves in. now, we do have some agreement on the need to expedite consideration of the claims of these matters for asylum or other forms of relief. but a $12.9 million, the bill falls short of even the administration's modest request for more immigration judges. instead of focusing on this area of agreement, the majority relies on a questionable and controversial rewriting of the wilber force law. enacted in 2008 to deal with child trafficking. my own view is that the proposal incorporated in the bill both fails to address deficiencies in our present screening of mexican youths for signs of torture or fear of persecution and risk transferring these deficiencies to the treatment of central american children. in any event, it's not wise to complicate or delay consideration of this emergency supplemental request with an

authorization bill that surely requires more deliberation. madam speaker, there have been some recent signs of progress down at the border. over the past few weeks, average daily apprehensions of unaccompanied children have dropped from 400 to well under 200. that doesn't mean the crisis is over. we could easyly see a spike in app -- easily see a spike in apprehensions in the coming weeks. we need reform that reflects our values. faith leaders of all traditions across the country are calling on congress to provide the social and health services these children desperately need. perhaps the greatest failing of this legislation is it fails to move us toward any viable long-term strategy to address the causes of the current crisis. beyond any funding we appropriate to help manage the flow of unaccompanied children or families over the next several months, we are setting ourselves up for similar crises in the future if we aren't lling to ininvest in a

long-term strategy in guatemala, honduras and el salvador. to stabilize their economies, modernize their institutions, reduce violence due to cartels and street gangs. madam speaker, i fear that the bill before us fails to address either short-term or long-term needs, and much of what it does contain is irrelevant to the current crisis. i urge a no vote and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. rogers: madam speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentleman from texas who chairs the homeland security committee of the house, mr. mccaul of texas. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for two minutes. mr. mccaul: i thank the tchimplee appropriations committee for his hard work and chairman kay granger for heading

up this task force i was happy to be part of. as a former federal prosecutor who has dealt with border security for many years, i have never seen a crisis quite like this one this crisis demands action and leadership. it demands a solution to the problem. daca the president enacted in 2012, we've seen 60,000 unaccompanied children cross the border in the rio grande valley sector of texas alone, 250 per day. we went down there to see these children. these children are the victims caught between the administration's policies and the coyotes and the traffickers who exploit them and make money, between $5,000 to $10,000 apiece. madam speaker, this bill fixes that crisis. first and foremost it changes the 2008 trafficking law as a message of deterrence. this crisis will not stop until we start sending them back.

and all this does is treat central americans the same way we treat mexicans. it will provide for swift removal in a humane way back to their countries of origin. it's unfortunate that the administration, while initially supportive, has now flip-flopped on that issue. it also provides for the detention, removal, and repatriation of these children. for me, in my home state of texas, importantly, it calls for the deployment of the national guard to the southwest border to secure our border. my governor, governor perry, has already activated the national guard. but it is a -- but it is the federal government's responsibility under the constitution to pick up that price tag and that's precisely what this bill does. finally, madam speaker, i think importantly, it directs the southern command, our military, to help secure the border between guatemala and mexico which i believe, and i know the

chairman of the appropriations believes -- believes as well, is key to stopping the flow out of central america. madam speaker, the time to act is now. with that, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. mrs. lowey: i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the gentlelady from california, ms. roybal-allard, a member of both the labor, health and human services and the homeland security committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for two minutes. ms. roybal-allard: two weeks ago, i visited the border and saw small children held in tiny cells, forced to sleep on cold floors and bemples. the treatment of these vulnerable kids, many of whom fled their homes to escape extreme violence, shocked me as a mother and a person. unfortunately this bill contains only 11% of the president's request for the department of health and human services this palt ray allowance will only

make conditions worse for these vulnerable children by limiting the bed space capacity and exacerbating delays in transferring children away the overcrowded border patrol stations into the more suitable conditions of h.r. -- of h.h.s. unfortunately, insufficient funding isn't the only flaw in this bill. by treating all children the same, the majority means taking away protection and treating central american children like mexican and canadian children who have limited protections under current law. this legislation sadly undercuts the current critical humanitarian and due process protections for these desperate children seeking safe haven from the horrors of violence in their country. without due process, many of these children who would qualify for protection under our laws will be returned straight into the arms of their traffickers or their impoverished, violent, neighborhoods.

that's why national anti-trafficking organizations like the alliance to end slavery and trafficking strongly oppose this bill. mr. speaker, the republican supplemental is an irresponsible and inadequate bill that does little to protect our border or address the humanitarian crisis facing our nation. the bill is a senseless and deeply flawed political ploy that my republican colleagues know will be rejected by the senate. instead of playing political games, let us act in the best interests of our country and these kids by passing a bill that upholds our american values, honor ours heritage as a nation of immigrants, protect ours borders, and fully addresses the causes and consequences of the humanitarian crisis on our border. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. rogers: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from pennsylvania, a member of our committee, mr. dent. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania is

recognized for two minutes. mr. dent: thank you, madam speaker. i rise in very strong support of this border security legislation presented to us today for a number of reasons. it does provide for humanitarian assistance. this does deal with -- this legislation does deal with this issue in a compassionate, thoughtful way to deal with unaccompanied children. it secures the border, provides funding for the national guard and does many other things in terms of policy changes that will treat these children just as we would treat unaccompanied children who cross the border from canada or mexico. s the right policy for a whole host of reasons. congressman k, gerlach, meehan and i visited a resettlement program in pennsylvania. those children are treated compassionately. but let me tell you what will happen if we do nothing here today. the children who are coming into children willhese

in fact keep coming into our communities and they will be treated humanely and then they'll be resettled and reunited with parents or family members who already -- were already in the united states and in most cases here unlawfully. that's what doing nothing means. the children will keep coming, they will be resettled throughout the country and they will basically reside somewhere within the interior of this country. that's what doing nothing means. it would be reckless and irresponsible for the house to walk out of here today without addressing this border and humanitarian crisis this bill is the right thing to do. it secures the border, provides humanitarian assistance and makes the necessary policy changes to stop this flow of children. s that tragedy that these children are leaving their countries in this way. i can't imagine the desperation these families must feel, that they must feel that they would let their children travel with somebody unaccompanied, drug dealers, cartels, smugglers, coyotes. we need to make sure this stops.

i met with a 5-year-old girl who told me her horrible story, and i just -- i shudder to think of the children who didn't make it. that's why we need to act today. it's the right thing to do, compassionate thing to do, and it is in keeping with our american tradition. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time is expire the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. mrs. lowey: i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from maryland, the minority whip of the house. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 2002 minutes. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentlelady for yielding. i was going to ask my friend from pennsylvania whether he talked to the senate and whether it has any chance of moving this week and the answer is, i know it does -- is that no, it does not. it would be tragic not to act. it's tragic that we're acting in a partisan fashion that almost ensures inaction on this, the last day we're going to be here.

we should be acting in a bipartisan fashion, as i've urged the majority leader to do. what is a bipartisan fashion? a, considering the emergency need today. and funding the resources necessary to respond to that. b, taking under consideration the substantive lebling slative changes that can be affected that will help this issue, will send the mess annals that the gentleman wants to send. he's my dear friend and a good member of this body. but i will tell you this bill as had no hearings, no committee consideration, yes, there was a partisan task force, but this is had no -- this has had no consideration in this process. the majority leader last week, last week, told me that there would be no bill that did not get 72 hours' notice. the gentleman knows off bill on the floor which is contingent on the passage of this which has

had a few hour's notice at best. last night, i think, at 10:00 the rules committee met. i will tell my friend that, had we acted in a bipartisan fashion, at whatever level of funding we could agree, pass a bill to pete the immediate crisis, b, have hearings. on the ramifications of the law that passed with only two votes in opposition. er 405 members voted for the 2008 legislation. we are changing that without a hearing. either in subcommittee, committee, or full committee. that's not the way we ought to be working. that's not good for our country. it's not good for this institution. it's not fair. so i would urge my colleagues to defeat this legislation. is that my two minutes? may i get one additional minute? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one additional minute. mr. hoyer: i believe once again we find the republican party

divided and because they're divided they're trying to cobble together some of their hardest line members so that they can get them to vote for this supplemental. they put on a bill which has had no notice to the american people or to members of congress. it's ironic that people are supporting this who demanded that we read the bills. there was no bill to read. until this morning. how sad for the american people. we have a humanitarian crisis that must be addressed without delay and the way to address it without delay is to give the resources necessary and then pursue the legislative process, not together, it will slow it down and i predict will not pass the senate. i thank the gentleman and ladies on this -- i think the gentlemen and ladies on this side of the aisle know the senate won't pass the bill. if you really think we ought to act now, do so in a bipartisan fashion and then let us debate the legislation before us. mr. mccaul just said,s that real

crisis. just said, minutes ago, mr. mccaul, the chame of the committee, this is a real crisis which demands action. the recommendation that's been made to us will undermine action by this body in the face of crisis. we should not pass this legislation. we ought to pass a very simple resource to the crisis now and legislation later. i urge my colleagues to vote no the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. rogers: i don't know where the gentleman gets his information but this bill was filed tuesday. you've had since tuesday morning to study this bill and that's the appropriate, under our rule, that's the appropriate time. mr. hoyer: will the gentleman yields? the daca legislation is dependent on this legislation. that was not filed 72 hours ago. mr. rogers: that the not this bill. reclaiming my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kentucky has the

floor. mr. rogers: this bill has been available to you since tuesday. may i inquire the time we have remaining, madam speaker? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kentucky has 7 1/2 minutes. the gentlewoman from new york has 14 minutes. mr. ronellers: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman -- mr. rogers: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. mrs. lowey: madam speaker, i am pleased to yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. fattah, the ranking member of the commerce, justice, and science subcommittee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognize for two minutes. mr. fattah: i thank the gentlelady. we are here because the president of the united states has requested a -- an emergency supplemental appropriation of about $3.7 billion.

the senate has acted in the range of about $2.7 billion. the house now comes with 1/6 of the request to deal with this crisis. it ignores the wildfires in the west. the challenges that relate to other parts of the bill. that were presented by the administration. and it says we're acting responsibly. i rise in opposition to the bill. i understand what the majority is offering. i think it's been stated pretty clearly, i believe if we have children who are presented to us without adults, who have been the victims of trafficking, which is what the majority has said, they've been trafficked by artels and paid criminal enterprises to bring them to our border, the majority says some of them have been sexually abused and mistreated in other

ways. i don't believe that our response should be to close the door. so as we think about our responsibility as the united states of america, a nation that had 12 million people without documents when the president was sworn into office, 50,000 children, just like the 5-year-old girl my colleague said he met and talked to, the idea that what our moral responsibility is is to say to her, you go back to where you came from, i don't believe that that's what we should be doing. so i reject this, not because of the numbers or the other things. i think this is morally deficient that our great country would say, as we demand other countries around the world, that they take in refugees who are facing dangerous circumstances, that what our answer is, is no,

not here. not in our backyard. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. rogers: madam speaker, i yield two minutes to the chairman of the house judiciary committee, mr. good lat of virginia. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia is recognized for two minutes. mr. goodlatte: madam speaker, i thank the gentleman from kentucky for his leadership on this issue. i urge my colleagues to support h.r. 5230. there is a crisis at our border. it is a crisis, a disaster of the president's own making. 's lax a administration immigration foreign policies says they can stay and now they are finding ways to bring their children who are still in central america and beyond to the united states unlawfully. although president obama has many tools at his disposal to stop this surge at the border, he refuses to use them and

instead proposes to make the situation worse by taking more unilateral actions to stop the enforcement of our immigration laws. it is ultimately up to president obama to end this crisis by reversing his policies that created it. however, since he refuses to do so, we have to act to the extent we can to provide narrow and targeted funding to meet the immediate needs of our law enforcement agencies at the southern border. we have to enable them to do their job, to secure our border and enforce our immigration laws. and we should act to provide narrow tweaks to the 2008 law regarding the removal of unaccompanied alien minors. because of the president's inaction, we are taking the responsible step today of passing these narrow fixes that will help the american people avoid billions of dollars in additional costs due to the president not trying to solve this problem but asking for more money to continue to resettle thousands and

thousands, tens of thousands of people into the interior of our country. while the bill is not perfect, it does not give -- it does give law enforcement many tools they have requested. for example, while i was in the rio grande valley earlier this month, border patrol agents cited the administration created restrictions that bar them access to federal lands as a significant stumbling block to securing the border. one of the most important provisions of this bill gives border patrol agents access to federal lands so they can stop drug traffickers, human smugglers and unlawful immigrants from exploiting these gaps along the border. since the president isn't taking serious action to address the crisis at the border, the house is doing so today, and i urge my colleagues to support this bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. mrs. lowey: madam speaker, i am pleased to yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from california, the chair of

the house democratic caucus, mr. becerra. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for two minutes. thank the i ranking member for yielding. i agree with those who've said that doing nothing is not an option. but making matters worse should not be an option either. stripping children of the chance to establish their credible fear of death or endangerment is a crude and cold way of dispensing justice in america. that is not an american way. this bill is a patch, not a solution. it lasts two months. so we'll be right back here trying to solve this challenge again in september. governing and budgeting in pieces is what leads to government shutdowns. that's not the american way. this bill robs peter to give to

paul. how does this bill fund the money to pay for the border work that has to get done? first, it strips emergency funding to tackle devastating wildfires that the president has requested because the states have requested it. second, it takes $407 million from the federal emergency management agency's disaster relief fund. money which would be used to help people who've been devastated by wildfires and other natural disasters. madam leader, if we had passed immigration reform a year ago with the bill that passed the house on a bipartisan basis which in this floor we've been denied a vote for more than 380 days, we would not be looking at a crisis on the border the way we are today, but that's the difficulty you have. when you don't fix the broken immigration system, that's what

you encounter, and these piecemeal approaches won't solve anything. we'll be right back at it in september. that is not the american way. we provide justice to people. we make sure we dispense it the way we should and we take care of our emergencies. let's get it done the right way. let's do two things. let's give the emergency funding that they need at the border to run this crisis right and let's have a vote on the floor to fix the broken immigration system. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from kentucky. robb robb madam speaker, i yield two minutes to -- mr. rogers: madam speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentleman from arizona, mr. salmon, a member of the task force that investigated the border problem. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arizona is recognized for two minutes. mr. salmon: i rise in strong support of secure the southwest border act of 2014. this kind of came to light a few months ago when the arizona republic noted a story that

these families were being dropped off at the bus stations in tucson and phoenix and then highlighted the current administration's catch -and-release policies that are encouraging literally swarms of people to come across the 1,500-mile desert of new mexico into the united states, risking .ife, risking their happiness and the fact is we can't keep doing nothing. and this bill will stop these waves and waves of people coming across our border. as we went over to guatemala and we went to honduras and we talked with our state department folks, that's exactly what they said. you've got to make it clear that we move from a catch-and-release policy to a detain-and-deport policy and that's what this bill does. if we want to send a strong message to people that that

$5,000 to $8,000 they're paying to these thugs that are transporting them across the border and hurting these young boys and girls along the way and then holding them for extra money, extorting their parents, that if we want to stop this from happening and stop the pain that's going on with these children, then the best thing we can do is send a clear message that in america there is no permisos. if you make that journey you'll be sent back to your country. that's the only thing that will make it happen. liberal friends want to throw more money at the problem and perpetuate the problem. they want it to keep happening. i say that's not compassionate. i say continuing that pain and that harm to these children is not a good thing to do, and the way to stop it is to send a clear message. we got folks on my side of the aisle that have problems with the bill. what do they have a problem with? nothing inside the bill. not putting the national guard on the border, not stopping the catch-and-release programs and not giving unfettered access to our border patrol. they can't come up with a good

reason to vote against it. they're playing into harry reid's hands. mr. rogers: madam speaker, i yield the gentleman an extra minute and wonder if he'd yield? mr. salmon: yes, i'll yield. mr. rogers: do you understand that if we do nothing the experts have told us, if we don't change the law, experts have told us that another 145,000 people will be with us next year alone, is that not correct? mr. salmon: that's correct. conservative estimates said it will cost $2.6 billion to care for the nearly 60,000 that are already here. we're talking about billions and billions of dollars, not to mention the fact that these children are being sexually molested along the way, that they're being killed along the way, that they're being sold into slavery and we can stop it. mr. rogers: if the gentleman will yield? mr. salmon: yes, sir. mr. rogers: i'm focusing on the money part of it. if we don't change the law, you're saying we can expect to pay another few billions of dollars a year -- mr. salmon: just to care for those people.

mr. rogers: to care for those people coming across? mr. salmon: yes. i don't understand how any conservative in good conscience would not stop that hemorrhage and make sure we're not spending those billions of dollars to pay down our debt. mr. rogers: not only conservatives but everybody would like those kinds of savings. mr. salmon: i would do. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. mrs. lowey: madam speaker, i'd just like to say to the distinguished chairman, i would have liked to hear from these experts at hearings. unfortunately, the majority has not had hearings and we're bringing this bill to the floor without any hearing, without any witnesses, without any information. and i'm pleased to yield to the distinguished speaker one minute. mr. rogers: would the gentlelady yield briefly on that point? would the gentlelady briefly yield? mrs. lowey: ail ill' be delighted. mr. rogers: the 145,000 additional people across the border, that number came from

the department of homeland security. so those are governmental estimates if we do nothing on the law change. i thank the gentlewoman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. mrs. lowey: i'd like to say to our distinguished chairman that it would be helpful in having an analysis of the current statistics and the future prospects at hearings, but we're bringing this bill to the floor, the majority is bringing this bill to the floor without any hearing, without any discussion. this is really not the way to pass important legislation. and, again, we had a bill. we could have had comprehensive immigration reform that passed the senate in a bipartisan way, but thank you, mr. chair, and i'm pleased to yield one minute to the gentlelady from california, ms. pelosi. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from california is recognized for one minute. ms. pelosi: thank you, madam speaker. i thank the gentlelady for yielding, our ranking member on the appropriations committee who from day one knowing of

this challenge that we have with the children at the border as reacted in a very wise, humanitarian, yes, practical way as to what the best way is to address the challenge under the values of our country and save the children. i was interested in the back and forth between the distinguished chairman of the appropriations committee, mr. rogers, and our ranking member on the subject of the change in the law that is in the legislative language that is in this supplemental. because i agree with our distinguished whip, mr. hoyer, and others who have said there are two things happening here. one is we need to address the challenge, the humanitarian challenge. we need resources to do that for particular purposes, and we should do that in the supplemental. another is to change the law

which we shouldn't do in a supplemental. it is legislative -- legislating on an appropriations bill in a manner in which all kind of statements can be made which may be anecdotally significant but not significant in terms of the difference that they make -- a difference enough to change the law. and so when people talk about witnesses in one context or another, just saying something on the floor of the house, it's interesting. but there should be hearings, if we're going to change the law, there should be hearings where testimony can come forth, challenged, confirmed, whatever it may be. but a serious discussion worthy of the country that we are, worthy of the congress that passed the wilber force law which was a very bipartisan initiative, and i salute my republican colleagues who played such an important role in passing the bill.

and that bill directed agencies of government to incorporate anti-trafficking and protection measures for vulnerable populations, particularly women and children, into whether it's postconflict or humanitarian emergency assistance and program activities, according to the law. there was a purpose for the law . with a phrase in an appropriations bill we want to undermine that purpose, that's not necessary to do here. why does this belong in a bill where we are allocating resources to meet a humanitarian challenge that we have? now, let's get to what's in the actual supplemental. i had hoped that we could work in a bipartisan way, and i thought that's the path we were on. the republican majority wanted

to decrease the amount of resources and the amount of time. well, that's commensurate. it's a lower amount of money in a shorter period of time, that's ok. but when you change what that money is for, then you are doing a disservice to the entire issue. instead of providing adequate resources to meet the humanitarian needs, the immediate humanitarian needs largely of these children, that is just totally inadequate in this legislation in terms of its proportionality in the bill. whether it does not -- it fails to provide any resources for legal assistance to these children to plead their case. they may have a legitimate cause for asylum refugee status to come into the united states or not. but they should be represented

and they should be represented in a way that repatriates them back to their home country if they do not qualify in a way that is safe. this legislation does not do that. . the american people are fair minded, they are wise, they are practical, they want to help but they want to do so in a way that is fair to everyone involved. they want to see the children. there's not enough resources here to do that on the humanitarian side. they want us to honor who we are with due process for these children. this legislation does not do that. they want to have judges to quickly facilitate giving these people a hearing in addition to the representation that they should have due process. the bill does not. it tramples due process to rush terrified children back to the violence of their home countries. that's not who we are as a country.

and it also poses a particular dangetory children victims of gang violence and human -- danger to children victims of gang violence and human trafficking. human trafficking. it's a global crisis. it is happening at our border. we have a bill to stop it. this legislation on the floor today weakens that and then a manner of distribution of funds and pause it of funds does not -- paucity of funds does not address the challenge. it takes us backward. it's hard to understand. now, what we should be talking about is what mr. tierney suggested, how do we help communities that are receiving these children into their communities and our country? again, how do we help? this bill hurts. so in addition to this, we -- i guess the way you were able to

get the votes for this bill, which is even opposed by people who are anti-immigration because it's not bad enough, you had to sweeten the pie by having a follow-up bill that would only be taken up if enough of your members agreed to vote for this bad bill. not hat, again, does address who we are as a country. we are a great country because we are a good country. as long ve said that ago as 200 years ago or longer. so let us be good and let us be great and let us do something that really was closer to what the republicans were talking about earlier in this discussion . it seems that in order to get more votes you had to make the ill worse. worse the bill, the more votes

on the republican side. no, let's find common ground in the middle where we can get the most votes to do the best possible job that we can do. it may not be every good thing that we would ideally like to do, but is a reasonable place to go forward and to honor what the national catholic conference of bishops have talked about, where all the people of faith are urging us to do here in the congress of the united states. and that is, to honosly respect the dignity and -- honestly respect the diggity and worth of all these children, all of them children of god. i get mobbed for quoting what the bishops have said because it is so generous to the children. but let's give the children a fair shot. let's do wetter -- better than this. you know this bill isn't going anywhere. so once again it is a waste of time. it is not a statement of values.

it is a statement of meanness. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. rogers: may i inquire of the time remaining? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kentucky has 5 1/2 minutes. the gentlewoman from new york has nine minutes -- eight minutes. mr. rogers: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the entleman reserves. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. mrs. lowey: madam speaker, i'm pleased to yield three minutes to the gentleman from california, mr. farr, the ranking member of the agricultural subcommittee of appropriations. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for three minutes. mr. farr: thank you, madam ranking chair, for yielding. i rise, madam speaker, on this bill with great concern. i feel bringing a lot of fashions to this debate because i lived in the barrios, like the ones children were coming from,

when i was a peace corps volunteer in latin america. this is not a border crisis. this is not a border security issue. this is a humanitarian crisis. it's caused by problems on both sides of the border. our country has a lot at fault here because we have not addressed comprehensive immigration reform, which means we have 11 million people living in the united states undocumented. they are essentially incarcerated in this contry. they are not allowed to go home because the minute they go home and try to get back to the united states, they get arrested and they are not allowed to ever return. or barred for 10 years to return. what happens? they have been living here for years and years. they have children that they left because there were job opportunities here. and those children are now living in places that are really dangerous. and all of a sudden, yeah, things have changed. they got to get out. these countries are ranked number one, four, and five of the highest murder rates in the

world. they're leaving because there are real serious humanitarian crisis and they are showing up on our border and they are not sneaking across the board he -- border. they are throwing themselves, help me, help me find my relative, my dad, my parent, my mom in this country. what does this bill do? it doesn't address the humanitarian problems at either end. it hires more cops and puts military in there, national guardsmen. if that's such a great idea, why is california, with probably the busiest border in the world with mexico, not putting the national guard down there? our governors and mayors don't think it's necessary. why are we putting more money for -- in for national guard? we don't need national guard we need red cross.

humanitarian crisis. money for arms and more money for military and cops. i don't think that's the right answer. we are also doing some something really dumb. we are stripping a law now that says when we give money to these countries -- by the way, before you spend this money on your cops and military, you got to vet them. we have a human rights standard. this bill throws that out. you don't have to do that now. we are going to give you $40 million of american taxpayer money and you don't have to do anything to abide by human rights. that's really dumb. i don't think american taxpayers want their money spent that way. you know, i'm going to call upon my colleagues here not to come down here and think of themselves in a partisan way or election year way. come to this floor when you have to vote on this bill and think of yourself as a parent, as a neighbor. a kid who's knocked on your door and you go, say, oh, my god, she's crying anne, what's

happened? my house, they are raping people and killing people and i'm running away. this bill says, oh, what's your address, i'll take you home. don't vote for it. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. rogers: madam speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentleman from texas, mr. cuellar. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for two minutes. mr. cuellar: thank you, madam speaker. i support full comprehensive immigration reform, but today's vote on this supplemental appropriation bill is to provide funding to i.c.e., border patrol, and other agencies to deal with the humanitarian crisis on the border, an area i represent, an area where i live, an area where 42,000 out of the 58,000 unaccompanied kids have crossed. the policy change in this bill is to get rid of a loophole in the 2008 law that the smugglers in central america and mexico have taken advantage of. all due process and legal

protections are left intact under this proposed bill. you will see under a c.r.s. report that compares the current law to today's bill, you will see the same due process, the same legal protections are left intact. in fact, i respectfully ask my colleagues in opposition to show me specifically where there's due process and legal protection is taken away out of the bill. i yet have heard where it does this. i have also asked my colleagues in opposition respectfully to sit down with me and offer their alternative solution or their legislative proposal to this border crisis and have yet to hear those solutions. in this appropriation bill we have to provide the funding for the federal agencies to provide an orderly border. but we cannot no longer afford to play defense from the 1-year-old called the u.s.-mexico border. we need to play defense on the 20-yard line and this is why working with the central

american countries, working with mexico to address the core issues and to fix and fight the smugglers is vital. i want to thank the men and women on the border that have defended our homeland, and i want to thank the border communities and churches and nonprofits that have done so much to help this -- folks at the border. in fact, i want to thank the chairman for allowing a provision for the border communities to seek reimbursement for the allowable expenses under this bill. we cannot leave washington today without putting the resources and the policy changes to address the border crisis. we are sent here to address not the easy problems but to address the hard problems. john f. kennedy -- mr. rogers: i yield another minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is yielded another minute. mr. cuellar: thank you, mr. chairman. we are sent here to washington not to address the easy problems but to address the difficult problem that this nation is facing. when president john f. kennedy

was faced with a very difficult crisis, he said, i'm not looking for a republican answer or for a democratic answer, i'm looking for the right answer. and i think today in a bipartisan way we need to look for that right answer. i urge yes on this supplemental appropriation bill. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from kentucky reserves. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. mrs. lowey: madam speaker, i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the gentlelady from california, ms. lee, a member of the labor, health, and human services and foreign operations subcommittee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from california is recognized for two minutes. ms. lee: thank you very much. let me thank to our ranking member on approps, mrs. lowey, for yielding and your steadfast leadership. madam speaker, i rise in strong opposition to this woefully inadequate republican response to the humantarian crisis along our border. let me start by saying that as an appropriator i am very

troubled by the shameful inadequate funding levels and misguided offsets in this bill. i'm also deeply concerned by the dangerous policy riders that strips protections for vulnerable children, protections signed into law by a republican president, mind you. let's be clear. this crisis has nothing to do with the lack of funding for immigration enforcement. we don't do anything to help these children by pouring tax dollars into the further mill tarization of our border. and -- militarization of our border. that's what this bill does. our response needs to put children first. in a hearing this week we heard first hand from central american children who had fled violence in their home countries and had passed through our broken detention system. these children and thousands like them risk their lives on their way to this country. some have witnessed murders and gang violence in their home countries and suffered freezing conditions and inadequate

nutrition while in detention in the united states. these stories were chilling and made clear where we need to direct our resources -- humane care, access to due process, and support to end the violence and poverty plaguing honduras, el salvador, and guatemala. no one disagrees with protecting our borders, but come on, we also have a duty to protect these children who, according to the united nations high commission on refugees, 60% of whom were interviewed, these children need international protection. my home district makes up alameda county, where over 200 of these children have been reunited with their families locally. their stories are real. their stories are very, very powerful. so i urge a no vote. let's guarantee due process for these children who are fleeing violence. let's have a heart. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from kentucky

virginia tech. mr. rogers: may i inquire of the gentlelady from new york if she has further speakers? i'm prepared to close. you have one additional speaker? then i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kentucky reserves. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. madam speaker, , ore i turn to my colleague ms. lofgren from california, the ranking member, an expert on immigration, the subcommittee of the judiciary committee, i just want to make one statement again. the senate, after months of hearings, passed a bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform bill. it is really very sad that today we can't get together, democrats and republicans, and

review the work that had been done by the senate and pass a comprehensive immigration reform bill that would have prevented the emergency that we are trying to address today. the majority of the bill that is included in this supplemental should have been done through a thoughtful committee process. so i'm very pleased to turn the balance of our time to mississippi lofgren, a member of the immigration judiciary committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from california is recognized for the remaining two minutes. ms. lofgren: madam speaker, the u.s. conference of catholic bishops tells us this bill, quote, would result in the u.s. sending children who have relief available to them back to the conditions they fled and will result in many children being harmed and some being

killed on their return. i join the bishops in opposing this bill. with this bill, children who've been trafficked, who've fled persecution, violence and abuse will be stripped of protections that have existed for years. our laws provide that victims of persecution and torture must have a meaningful opportunity to request safe haven. we need not prejudge the outcome of these cases. we need only adhere to these laws that ensure that each child is treated in a fair matter that their case be individually considered, and if they deserve protection under the law, so be it. if not go home. this is not new. refugees have received protection in america for decades. in 1980, the asylum system that we have today was established. most of the special protections for unaccompanied children were created in 1997. many were codified in 2002, but critics of the anti-slavery law of 2008 claim it has caused the

influx of kids to america. but the protections began in 1997, 17 years ago. no. kids are fleeing because of the extreme violence in three countries. children from other countries in the region are not fleeing here, and people were honduras, el salvador and guatemala are fleeing to every other country in the region. a 17 -- a 712% increase in asylum cases in belize, anything rag with a and otherle -- nicaragua with a and other central american countries. what the bill did, the u.n. review now makes clear that as a consequence, we are sending kids who have been sex trafficked back to their abusers as a consequence. rather than fix this loophole, this bill would subject all kids to that flawed process. i can't help but note that this will be the only bill,

immigration bill with an up or down vote, a bill to strip victims of their protections. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentlewoman from new york's time has expired. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. for three minutes. mr. rogers: i yield myself the balance of the time. madam speaker, we have a crisis on our border with mexico right now. it can't wait. it's a humanitarian crisis. it's also a failure of our border. 's an open border now unless you fix it. f we don't change the law to treat central american children the same as we treat mexican children at the border, you're going to be flooded.

the amount now on the border will pale to incision because homeland security tells us that hey anticipate another 145,000 next year on top of the tens of thousands of adults and families flooding across that open border. we have an immediate crisis today. this bill is an urgently needed bill. it provides immediate funding for critical border security and these humanitarian needs. the money will be there immediately. if we do not pass this bill today, you're going to risk these resources running out. then your hands will be tied. more and more immigrants will continue to flood across that border if you fail to act.

this bill will allow the d.h.s., the department of homeland security, and the national guard to tighten security and restore the border . it will allow the department of justice to process the cases that may be needed more efficiently. it encourages repatriation in the countries from which these immigrants came, and it provides much-needed shelter and care for the thousands of unaccompanied children who've recently crossed that border. we must act today before we leave town, not only to protect our borders, but to help these unaccompanied children who are being brought here by iminals, no less, on a long, dangerous, arduous journey subject to abuse, injury and death along the way. how can you turn away from

these faces? this bill directs responsible levels of resources toward the front line, toward the highest priority needs. the bill puts policy measures into place that keep criminals out of the country and help encourage children not to make that very dangerous life-threatening journey. the president's request would do nothing to enforce our laws and make this nation a safer place. help the problem. stop the crisis. from thell was pulled floor and kevin mccarthy came to the floor. he said more votes might be possible later in the day. for what purpose does the

gentleman from california seek recognition? >> i >> i ask union the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. mccarthy: i want to advise all members that additional votes are possible today. we will send out information as soon as it is possible. mr. hoyer: if the gentleman will yield? mr. mccarthy: yes. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman. we're going to have to call some members back. they already left on the representation that this was the last vote of the day. i would imagine you have some members are in that category themselves. can the gentleman give me any idea of when we will have notice as to whether or not there will be further votes today? i yield to my friend. mr. mccarthy: i thank the gentleman for yielding. knowing that some members -- and this vote now closed, and earlier announced they would not walk off the floor at 3:45,

i think it's possible to advise all members that there are possible there will be votes today. i'm hopeful late this afternoon we'll be able to notify the ime. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. republicans that are looking at this and backed off of a vote amid discontent in their ranks. >> it was unusual, to say the least. andheard the clip there

kevin mccarthy did not get off to the start that he had envisioned as the new house majority leader. assume the formally role until midnight tonight. this is his first go around and his first go around as the new majority whip. orderhing looked to be in and they had the votes they thought they needed lined up in hinesville. afternoon,e as this we heard from leadership that they were preparing to move forward and have a vote on this bill. there is theen, announcement the bill would be postponed and no one knew why. there was an e-mail message on cell phones that said , essentially, an advisory that

the bill had been pulled from the floor and that set off chaos. members have been expecting a vote early in the afternoon and they did not have an idea why. everybody was under the impression that there was discontent and some members not fully on board. a majority of members were on board and expected a vote. a conference meeting. then, you have the leadership regrouping and meeting with members who voice concerns about pieces of legislation that they would like to see tweaked. they will reconvene tomorrow for a conference meeting and the hope of the leadership team is that they will be presenting some of the linguistic tweaks being made as we speak. a enough of the dissenters from the afternoon will be satisfied floor toon the house

pass this and go home for the august recess. about one or two republican senators in this. can you sort that out? >> it was reported that ted cruz was going to meet with a handful of house republicans at his senate office and this was blown out of proportion. senator cruz meets regularly with republicans and has them over for pizza and soda in his senate office. meetingtation for the last night when out one month ago and was not related to this beingular border bill debated. i'm told by several house republicans who were in the meeting last night that ted cruz did not voice any opposition to the border bill and was not

attempting to with votes against it. interestingly, another republican senator played a much larger role in what happened today. what we heard was that jeff sessions was not happy with the package but the house leadership was attempting to pass today and he let it be known to the members of the alabama congressional delegation that he would hope that they would vote against it. that apparently had enough of an impact and was in a tight enough margin today that if three or four members of the delegation did flip in the last minute and inform leadership they would not be voting yes, that could have moved the numbers enough to make the house leadership team pulled the bill off of the floor because of fear of being embarrassed.

>> the senate is working on a version of the emergency supplemental and has failed to advance that. where will it go from here? >> nowhere. it was being debated in the senate. much attention was on the house of representatives and there was a lot of handwringing going on with the inability to pass a bill. they are still in town and i would say there is a good likelihood that the house passes something tomorrow before they leave. side, there is a serious disconnect between what harry reid was going to allow and what senate republicans and the minority were willing to go along with. the attempts to pass a supplementary funding bill for the border was doomed from the start. and that is how it went down tonight. >> jim alberta of national

journal. thank you for being with us. >> surer. my pleasure. >> extending highway funding. both go to the president. they failed to move forward. reid warned there is little time off in september. period at home, i want everyone to know about what's going to happen when we come back. following the august recess, we're going to convene on september 8 and we're going to be here for one week, two weeks, and two days. that's it. september 23 is our target date to adjourn until after the election. i hope we can do that. this leaves us no more than as i've indicated two weeks and two

days. that's not a lot of time for the workload that we have to do. we need to pass appropriations measures to keep the government from shutting down. we need to pass temporary extension of the internet tax freedom act. we need to do something about, as i just mentioned, about ex-im bank. we have to do the defense authorization bill which is extremely important for the fighting men and women of this country. we are going to address the udall constitutional amendment on campaign finance reform. and we're going to reconsider a number of issues: college affordability, minimum wage, hobby lobby, student debt. so we have a lot of work to do. everyone needs to know when we come back on september 8 there will be no weekends off. there's only two weekends until we go home. everyone should not plan things on this weekend.

no one can say you need to give us notice. you have notice. i had a chairman's lunch yesterday. every chairman there said we should work those two weekends. everybody, this isn't me trying to dictate a schedule. my lunch yesterday with the chairmen of this institution said we should work those two weekends. i just mentioned a few of the things we have to do. again, saturday, september 13, sunday september 14, saturday september 20, sunday, september 21 we need to be here. including the fridays. every day between september 8 and september 30 is fair game. fridays, saturdays, sundays, we need to be here. i repeat for the third time here this morning. there is so much to do and so little time to do it. we've not had a productive congress. we can't push everything back to the so-called lame duck.

much of what we're able to accomplish in september depends on the republicans in the house. will they get their business done and pass legislation that's important for our country, including the economy? here we've lamented the fact that they refuse to take up and pass our comprehensive immigration reform. what a good piece of legislation. a bipartisan bill passed out of this body by an overwhelming margin and republicans refuse to take it up. among other things, mr. president, it will reduce the debt by $1 trillion. we have no extension of long-term unemployment benefits. i've talked about minimum wage. i've talked about student debt. i've talked about hobby lobby. i've talked about equal pay for women getting paid equally for the work they do that's the same as men.

but they have no interest in these issues. they certainly have no issues tr in getting corporate bosses out of health care for women. no, they're busy using the house floor for theater but it's a double feature -- i don't think they have double features, at least i don't think so anymore. it is a double theater. house republicans, first of all, are going to sue the president. and above all, the republicans in the house and the senate, the most antitrial lawyer group of legislators in the history of country but who are they going to? trial lawyers. who's going to pay those trial lawyers? the american taxpayers. and if that isn't enough, once

their lawsuit gets going, they're going to try to impeach the president. so that's what it's all about. mr. president, we have a lot to do. a lot depends on the political theater across the way here. if the house republicans are serious and focus their time on legislation that helps american families, then it could be a >> ron paul has written more than one dozen books on history. his latest is the school revolution. join the conversation as she takes your calls, e-mails, and tweaks. watch more next week while congress is in recess.

it features a wide range of topics, including the middle east, immigration, marijuana. book tv is television for serious readers. >> on the next washington journal, our first guest is ben schapiro and he will discuss the lawsuit and house how both are using it as a talking point. columbia will take your i wonder about -- holmes norton from the district of columbia will take your questions. journal is live on c-span every day at 7:00 and you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. >> silvia morris is our guest.

>> she was so beautiful and smart. and even insistible richard: was at the party and they had coffee. at one point, she stroked his said, i have never met an 18-year-old who i wanted to leap into bed -- 80-year-old i have wanted to leap into bed with. personalbout a relationship during her final years. it is on q and a. on thursdaye call to the security council, a u.n. official condemned the attack on

the school and call that a violation of international law. the meeting began with an update on casualties on both sides of a 72 hourct and cease-fire was announced in gaza. this is 20 minutes. >> the current crisis in gaza takes place agains hostilities and the ongoing blockade land, air, and sea. the crossings for limited pedestrian movements. of gaza'st, over 80% population, over half of them children under the age of 18,

rely on humanitarian aid. the use ofs apply on the gaza strip. waters are totally or partially inaccessible. they are estimated to be food insecure and unemployment remains high at 43%. the economy is more advanced. this volatile situation has been exacerbated by 24 days of conflict. thousands of palestinians have been killed and 6000 injured. over 80% of those killed are civilians. 251 children. israel has faced rocket fire. 59 have been killed, three civilians, and 56 soldiers. dozens injured.