Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I oppose this amendment.
At this funding level, the bill supports more than $585 million in increases for counterterrorism and intelligence programs. At the same time, the bill makes long overdue reinvestments in traditional Department of Justice missions like drug and firearms enforcement, regulation of the marketplace, protection of civil rights and liberties, support of the judicial process and State and local assistance. Specific initiatives include: $63 million for new funding to address white collar crime;
$24 million in new funds to reinvigorate and expand civil rights enforcement; $71 million to improve the safety and security of inmates and guards in Federal prisons; $345 million in new funds to safeguard the Southwest border, address the Mexican cartel violence, and support activities
of the Department of Homeland Security; and $3.4 billion in grant funding for State and local enforcement assistance, including $298 million to put additional police on the beat, $100 million for prisoner reentry initiatives, and $94 million for tribal law enforcement.
These investments are absolutely necessary, unlike what the gentleman has suggested that somehow they're unnecessary, that somehow this is change that can be found, and these programs can be cut. In fact, what we are doing is reinvesting in the law enforcement infrastructure of this country on the border, in our cities, and in the issues of white-collar crime.
I would hope that he would understand that this is an essential part of this legislation and that this was carefully crafted as we consulted with people across the various jurisdictions within these institutions to make sure that we could, in fact, provide them to be secure and to serve the needs of this Nation. I think this has been a good-faith effort to do that, and I would hope that we would reject this amendment.
I ask for a ``no'' vote.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, carefully crafted? Carefully crafted? A 24.2 percent increase, $13 billion increase, carefully crafted?
I never suggested that these programs weren't important. What I suggested, Mr. Chairman, was that out of the entire budget of the Department of Justice, can we not save a penny on a dollar? Can we not save a penny on a dollar when the American people are struggling across this land to find pennies that the Federal Government is stealing from them? Can we not just save a penny on a dollar? It's a simple thing to do, Mr. Chairman.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield to my friend from Texas (Mr. Gohmert).
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, again, I think it's important to appreciate that in the context of this overall bill, in the context of this portion of the appropriations process that's gone from $51 billion in 2008 to $64 billion this year, that's a 24.2 percent increase, a $13 billion increase. Can we not find $100 million? In fact, that's what the President asked, to find $100 million in savings. It wasn't too much for the President to ask.
Let's help out this administration in their minimal attempts to provide fiscal responsibility, minimal attempts. I urge my colleagues to support an amendment that all it's asking for is saving less than one penny out of every dollar.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price).
The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the noes appeared to have it.