Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2020
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of this amendment and actually thank the gentleman for bringing this amendment to the floor.
As I had said yesterday, I certainly understand the concerns and the potential misuse of Census data, but by law the Census Bureau cannot and it will not disclose anyone's response or share data from which an individual can be identified with ICE or any other agency.
Thankfully the law is already on the books. Census data sharing is a felony punishable by up to 5 years in prison and a $250,000 fine. Census data is important, and it is confidential.
Fortunately, the Census Bureau is deploying expert communicators and trusted messengers all across the United States to work in each community to motivate each and every person to respond to the Census, and it would also help to spread the word that a person's response that they are not a citizen of the United States does not provide the government with really any reliable information about whether they are lawfully present in the U.S.
So, even if this information was sent to ICE, it would really have no use. It would be of no use to them. A successful 2020 Census will provide a full, accurate, secure account of every person living in the U.S. while gathering the data vital to both understanding our Nation's changing demographics and bolstering the enforcement of the Voting Rights Act.
Therefore, I join my colleagues in opposing any funds that would be made available to violate the confidentiality laws governing our Census, and I thank the gentleman for raising this issue and certainly support a ``yes'' vote on this important amendment.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, a vote for this amendment is a vote to effectively decriminalize the action of crossing the border unlawfully.
The passage of this amendment would directly undermine the sovereignty of the United States, and furthermore, if passed, the amendment would immediately be seized upon by every criminal human smuggling organization and used as a selling point to convince migrants to come to the United States in an unlawful manner.
It would trigger a flood of illegal immigration unlike anything we have ever seen, which will cause most of the most vulnerable individuals to attempt to embark on a dangerous journey. Cartels and human smuggling organizations will profit. Our borders will be less secure. And the American people will pay the cost of open borders for years to come.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment, although I do not oppose the amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of the gentleman's amendment. I have seen firsthand the positive impacts of NASA's Space Grant College and Fellowship Program in my home State of Alabama, and because of the good work that has come out of that, I urge adoption of the amendment, to further our students' STEM education opportunities. I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, it should be noted here that the comprehensive opioid addiction grants in this bill have been increased by 360 percent since they were created in 2017. Of course, opioid abuse and addiction is a very big problem in this country, and, certainly, we need to work on that, so I do not oppose the gentlewoman's amendment.
But please know, it should be noted that we have increased this by 360 percent, but we want to work with both sides to make sure that we have the appropriate funds necessary to make sure we fight this opioid addiction that has taken over so many parts of the country.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, the goal of the Department of Justice is to house inmates in the least restrictive environment that is possible and at the same time provide safety and security for the staff, for the inmate population, and to the public in general.
Just as in the community, disruptive individuals occasionally need to be placed in a jail or a holding facility to maintain the safety of its residents. The Bureau of Prisons has to place disruptive inmates in restrictive housing in order to maintain safety and security for the overall well-being of all the inmates.
The appropriate and reasonable use of restrictive housing is critical to the safety of the staff and to the Bureau's policies and procedures, and they try to strike an appropriate balance between the safety of those individuals who are on the staff there working at the Bureau of Prisons but also for the inmates themselves.
Restrictive housing involves two inmates per cell, in the vast majority of cases, and the inmates have daily access to staff and to programming. It is only in very rare cases that inmates are in a single cell in restrictive housing--for example, an inmate who has killed a cellmate or an inmate who has made repetitive or credible threats to kill anyone who is housed with him.
Every year, we mourn the loss of dedicated corrections professionals who lose their lives while they are working to ensure our Nation's inmates can no longer harm members of the community and harm each other.
We must not attempt to substitute our judgment here on this House floor for that of the highly trained corrections professionals at the Bureau of Prisons and the United States Marshals Service. I think to do so would be a disservice and would make their jobs even more dangerous.
Mr. Chair, I urge a ``no'' vote on the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition, but I don't oppose the amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition, but I don't oppose the amendment.
I think that this is a very important issue, and I think this needs to be dealt with. Increased funding to reduce the sexual assault kit backlog is very important, so we support the amendment.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I claim time in opposition.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
This administration remains committed to providing more affordable healthcare options to all Americans, and debating the prospects of future judicial action will not help us, as a Congress, deliver on our promise to bring better healthcare to our constituents. The administration has promised to ensure that, regardless of the outcome, they will support the legislation to address any legal determination.
In addition, let me say, it is not appropriate for Congress to tell the executive branch what positions it should take in court. Litigation strategy is the responsibility and the prerogative of the Department of Justice.
As the Attorney General recently testified during one of our committee hearings here on Capitol Hill, he said that they should be able to advance what he believes are defensible and reasonable legal positions, and I believe that certainly to be the case.
The Attorney General has concluded that the position of the States that challenge the ACA and the district courts is a defensible and reasonable legal position for the Department to take.
Questions of constitutionality should be determined by the courts and not through a partisan debate on funding limitation to an appropriations bill. So, therefore, Mr. Chair, I would urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chairman, I rise as the designee of the gentlewoman from Texas, and I move to strike the last word.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Spano).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Amendments En Bloc No. 3 Offered by Mr. Bishop of Georgia
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source