Mr. Chairman, my amendment is very similar to Mr. Gosar's. I think it is important that we continue the debate on this particular issue. What it says is that none of the funds made available by this act may be used to extend the expiration date of the memorandum titled Military Accessions Vital to the National Interest program changes. Again, it is the President reaching outside the bounds of the law. It is the President deciding he is a legislator instead of the executor. His job is to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, not make them up and go around the United States Congress. I think there is something missing from this debate. It is an assumption that if we have someone in the military and they happen to be covered under DACA, that somehow they are legal. The President can't legalize people that are unlawfully present in America by law. He just asserts that executively, and we have to go to court then to reverse it and get the courts to change that. But the President has relentlessly amended immigration law by executive fiat and executive edict, and this is another time. Under my amendment, he has the authority to put specialized people in place in the military if they have a special skill set. Now, one of those skill sets is not being an interpreter from English into Spanish. We have plenty of people who can do that. But it is for perhaps interpreters who speak Arabic; it is people who have special skills.…
Share & report
More from Steve King
Madam Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from Texas yielding to me. I rise in opposition to this rule. And I have a whole stack of things that I will raise, but in the time that is available, I will say this: We watched as the Medicaid…
Mr. Speaker, I was unable to vote on December 20, 2020 and December 21, 2020 due to not being in DC. Had I been present, I would have voted as follows: ``no'' on rollcall No. 248; ``no'' on rollcall No. 249; ``no'' on rollcall No. 250; and…
Madam Speaker, I was unable to vote on June 30, 2020, due to not being in D.C. Had I been present, I would have voted as follows: NO on Roll Call No. 130; NO on Rll Call No. 131; NO on Roll Call No. 132; and NO on Roll Call No. 133…
white nationalist, white supremacist, western civilization, how did that language become offensive?





