I appreciate Mr. Grijalva actually taking the lead on this issue. In fact, Republicans had two amendments that were introduced to the Rules Committee that dealt with this same specific issue. Again, in a spirit of bipartisanship, the two Republicans ones were not put in place but the Democrat one was, and at least we are addressing this particular issue. I do happen to have some objection to this one, because to me, what this amendment does, is put into statute or to put into language the status quo. Nothing in this act shall impede what we are already doing. I think this issue should be more forward thinking. We need to change what is happening in the status quo in this area that is simply now known as the trail of amnesty, where so much illegal narcotics work, illegal human trafficking and illegal gang activity has taken place. The article to which I referred actually specifies what that is there. That is why the amendments that were not made in order were superior to the one that is made in order here, and it should be recognized.
Rob Bishop: “I appreciate Mr. Grijalva actually taking the lead on this issue. In fact, Republicans had two amendments that were…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing amendments related to immigration and narcotics during a House floor debate.
Share
More from Rob Bishop
Is there any time remaining? The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Utah has 15 minutes remaining.
This hearing, as far as understanding truth of what went on, and coming up with a good history, is going to be invalid.
I include in the Record two documents. The first document is the dissenting views that Republicans filed on this bill in the committee. The second is the summary of problems that the Department of Commerce Inspector General, the GAO and…
Does that clearance have to be in the form of a written statement to the Chair? The SPEAKER pro tempore. As the Chair previously advised, that request cannot be entertained absent the appropriate clearance, which has not been received by…





