Watch: House Debates King Amendment Freeing Up  $601 Million for Border Wall Funding
Articles,  Blog

Watch: House Debates King Amendment Freeing Up $601 Million for Border Wall Funding


AMENDMENT 3 PRINTED IN PART B OF HOUSE REPORT 116-126. FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM IOWA SEEK RECOGNITION? MR. KING: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. TO OFFER AMENDMENT NUMBER 3, ACCORDING TO THE RULE. THE CHAIR: THE CLERK WILL DESIGNATE THE AMENDMENT. THE CLERK: AMENDMENT NUMBER 3 PRINTED IN PART B OF HOUSE REPORT 116-126 OFFERED BY MR. KING OF IOWA. THE CHAIR: PURSUANT TO HOUSE RESOLUTION 460, THE GENTLEMAN FROM IOWA, MR. KING, AND A MEMBER OPPOSED, EACH WILL CONTROL FIVE MINUTES. THE CHAIR RECOGNIZES THE GENTLEMAN FROM IOWA. MR. KING: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I RISE TO OFFER MY KING AMENDMENT NUMBER 3, AND WHAT IT DOES IS STRIKES SECTION 126 OF THE UNDERLYING BILL, AND SECTION 126 IS LANGUAGE THAT IS NOTWITHSTANDING LANGUAGE THAT PROHIBITS THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH FROM USING ANY OF THE FUNDS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY’S FORFEITURE FUND, THE CIVIL ASSET FORFEITURE FUND TO BE USED FOR ANYTHING TO BUILD A WALL OR A ROAD THAT MIGHT SUPPORT A WALL ON OUR SOUTHERN BORDER. AND THE LANGUAGE IS VERY EXPANSIVE. IN THE BILL IT SAYS NONE OF THE FUNDS MAY BE OBLIGATED, EXPENDING OR USED TO PLAN, DESIGN, CONSTRUCT OR CARRY OUT A PROJECT TO CONSTRUCT A WALL, BARRIER, FENCE OR ROAD ALONG THE SOUTHERN BORDER OF THE UNITED STATES OR A ROAD TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO THE WALL, BARRIER, FENCE CONSTRUCT ALONG THE SOUTHERN BORDER OF THE UNITED STATES. SO MY AMENDMENT STRIKES THAT LANGUAGE, MR. CHAIRMAN. IT DOES SO WITH THE IDEA IN MIND THAT WE HAVE A PRESIDENT WHO WAS ELECTED WITH A MANDATE TO SECURE OUR BORDER. THIS HAS BEEN AN ONGOING BATTLE FOR THE LAST TWO-PLUS YEARS, 2 1/2 YEARS, AND STILL THE RESOURCES ARE SHORT. I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE DONE A BETTER JOB IN THE PREVIOUS CONGRESS TO GET THAT MONEY INTO THIS PROJECT, BUT THE PRESIDENT IS GOING WHERE HE CAN TO FIND THE RESOURCES TO KEEP HIS CAMPAIGN PROMISES. AND SO I CERTAINLY WANT TO SUPPORT THAT BY STRIKING THAT LANGUAGE AND ALLOWING THE PRESIDENT TO THEN HAVE ACCESS TO WHAT AMOUNTS TO $601 MILLION THAT WOULD BE GENERATED, BE FREED UP BY MY AMENDMENT. IT RECOGNIZES THIS. THAT THE U.S. TREASURY HAS ABOUT $13.6 BILLION OF THAT ARE ALLOCATED TO IT UNDER THIS BILL. AND THIS SMALL PIECE OF MONEY HERE IS NOT A LOT OF MONEY, BUT IT DOES SEND A MESSAGE THAT IT’S GOING TO GET HARDER AND HARDER FOR THE PRESIDENT TO BUILD A WALL IF WE DON’T STRIKE THIS LANGUAGE. I WANT TO SUPPORT THE PRESIDENT’S MISSION TO DO THAT. IT’S IRONIC, I THINK, THAT WE ARE SPENDING TODAY — I’M THE ONLY ONE IN CONGRESS THAT I KNOW OF THAT TRACKS THIS SPENDING, BUT WE’RE SPENDING AT LEAST $6.7 MILLION A MILE FOR EVERY MILE OF THE 2,000 MILES OF OUR SOUTHERN BORDER TO SECURE THAT BORDER. AND JUST DOING THE MATH IN MY HEAD QUICKLY, THAT TURNS OUT TO BE ABOUT $13.4 BILLION, ALMOST THE EXACT SAME AMOUNT THAT’S FREED UP TO THE TREASURY, WE’RE SPENDING IT TO SECURE THE BORDER FOR SOMETHING PROBABLY LESS THAN 50% EFFICIENCY. WHEN YOU BUILD A WALL, IT’S 99. SOMETHING PERCENT EFFICIENT. WE NEED TO STRIKE THIS LANGUAGE IN THE BILL. WITH THAT I RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY TIME. THE CHAIR: THE GENTLEMAN RESERVES . FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM ILLINOIS RISE? MR. QUIGLEY: MR. RISE TO — MR. CHAIRMAN, I RISE TO CLAIM OPPOSITION TO THE GENTLEMAN’S AMENDMENT. THE CHAIR: THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES. MR. QUIGLEY: THIS AMENDMENT ENSURES THAT THE FORFEITTURE FUND THAT CAN RELY UPON THIS MONEY TO AUGMENT CRITICAL OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT EMERGENCY OPERATING NEEDS SUCH AS FORENSIC, TITLE 3, WIRETAP INTERCEPTS AND ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING INVESTIGATIONS. IT ALSO ENSURES THAT THE BIPARTISAN, BICAMERAL FUNDING LEVELS ENACTED BY CONGRESS AND SIGNED INTO LAW BY THE PRESIDENT ARE NOT THROUGHOUTED BY EXECUTIVE ACTION. ARTICLE 1, SECTION 9 OF THE CONSTITUTION STATES, NO MONEY SHALL BE DRAWN FROM THE TREASURY BUT IN CONSEQUENCE OF APPROPRIATIONS MADE BY LAW. ANY CONSTRUCTION OF BORDER INFRASTRUCTURE SHOULD BE BASED ON BIPARTISAN AGREEMENT, BETWEEN BOTH CHAMBERS OF CONGRESS THAT IS ENACTED INTO LAW. NOT BY AN IMPULSIVE DIRECTIVE FROM 1600 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE THAT DISREGARDS THE WILL OF CONGRESS AND UNDERMINES THE DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY AND DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY TO ADDRESS KNOWN THREATS AGAINST OUR FINANCIAL SYSTEM AND THE NATION. FOR THESE REASONS I OPPOSE THIS AMENDMENT AND URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO DO THE SAME. I RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY TIME. THE CHAIR: THE GENTLEMAN RESERVES. THE CHAIR RECOGNIZES THE GENTLEMAN FROM IOWA. MR. KING: I THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I’D YIELD TO THE GENTLEMAN FROM GEORGIA SO MUCH TIME AS HE MAY CONSUME. THE CHAIR: THE CHAIR RECOGNIZES THE GENTLEMAN FROM GEORGIA. MR. GRAVES: I RISE IN SUPPORT OF THE GENTLEMAN’S AMENDMENT. MRS. TORRES SAID THESE FUNDS COULD BE USED TO HELP LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT. IT CAN’T. THE STATUTE SAYS TO BE TRANSFERRED TO FEDERAL AGENCIES FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT PURPOSES. THAT’S WHAT THE ADMINISTRATION WAS USING THEM FOR. LITTLE BIT OF A HISTORY LESSON. LAST SIX MONTHS, WE WENT THROUGH A GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN BECAUSE OF THIS ISSUE. WE HAD A HOMELAND SECURITY CONFERENCE COMMITTEE REPORT THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO RESOLVE THIS ISSUE. SO DEFICIENT THAT THE PRESIDENT DECLARED A NATIONAL EMERGENCY RELATING TO THIS AND NOW WE’RE HAVING TO HAVE A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET DISCUSSION TO DEAL WITH THIS VERY SAME ISSUE WHILE RESTRICTING THE ADMINISTRATION’S ACCESS TO THESE FUNDS TO ADDRESS THIS VERY ISSUE. BECAUSE OF THOSE REASONS, I SUPPORT THE GENTLEMAN’S AMENDMENT AND ASK FOR ADOPTION. I YIELD BACK. MR. KING: MR. CHAIRMAN, I RESERVE. THE CHAIR: THE GENTLEMAN FROM IOWA IS RECOGNIZED. MR. KING: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I RESERVE. THE CHAIR: THE GENTLEMAN RESERVES. THE GENTLEMAN FROM ILLINOIS IS RECOGNIZED. MR. QUIGLEY: I YIELD BACK. THE CHAIR: THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS BACK. THE CHAIR RECOGNIZES THE GENTLEMAN FROM IOWA. MR. KING: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. JUST SOME CONCLUDING THOUGHTS ON THIS. THIS JUST — THIS IS $84.4 MILLION REQUESTED BY THE ADMINISTRATION. THERE ARE PLENTY OF ISSUES IN THE UNDERLYING BILL TO TAKE CARE OF THE OBLIGATIONS THIS CONGRESS HAS TO THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY. BUT THEY ALSO HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO SECURE OUR BORDER, RESTORE THE RESPECT FOR THE RULE OF LAW, AND THE CHAOS THAT WE HAVE ON THE BORDER IS NOT JUST SOMETHING THAT’S REFLECTING BACK ON US IN THE UNITED STATES — AND I’M HEARING MANY LAMENTS ABOUT THE TRAGEDIES, INDIVIDUAL TRAGEDIES. WE’RE COUNTING THEM, THOUGH, ON ONE HAND FOR THE MOST PART. I ASKED THE SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY UNDER OATH JUST LATE LAST YEAR, KIRSTJEN NIELSEN AT THE TIME, WHOM I RESPECT AND APPRECIATE, HOW MANY DIED ON THE WAY TO OUR SOUTHERN BORDER? SHE SAID, I DON’T HAVE THE DATA FOR THAT. I’LL GET TO YOU. I SAID, IT WILL BE TOO LONG FOR THAT. I WANT YOUR BEST ESTIMATE. HOW MANY DIED ON THE WAY FROM CENTRAL AMERICA TO OUR SOUTHERN BORDER? HER ANSWER FINALLY CAME, CONGRESSMAN, IT WOULD BE THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS. THAT’S THE HISTORY OF WHAT WE’RE TRYING TO SHUT OFF HERE, AND THEY WILL KEEP COMING UNTIL WE END UP DECIDING THAT WE’RE NOT GOING TO ACCEPT THEM ANY MORE. WE MUST SECURE OUR BORDER IF WE ARE GOING TO BE A SOVEREIGN NATION. THIS IS A PIECE OF IT. I SUPPORT THE PRESIDENT AND I URGE THE ADOPTION OF THIS AMENDMENT AND I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME. . THE CHAIR: THE GENTLEMAN-YEAR-OLDS BACK. — THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS BACK. THE QUESTION IS ON THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE GENTLEMAN FROM IOWA. THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. THOSE OPPOSED, NO. IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR, THE NOES HAVE IT. THE AMENDMENT IS NOT AGREED TO. MR. KING: I ASK FOR CHAIR, THE NOES A RECORDED VOTE. THE CHAIR: PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 6 OF RULE 18, FURTHER PR SEEDINGS ON THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *