Madam Speaker, the United States has gone to war numerous times to protect the sovereignty of nations. Sixty-four years ago on June 6, thousands of GIs went ashore in France because its borders were invaded by the Nazis. In fact, most of the European countries and north Africa had their sovereign borders overrun by the Nazis.

   In the Pacific, the United States fought the Japanese because they had invaded the borders of our territories and the borders of China and Indochina. Americans died. Over 400,000 died protecting all of those borders during World War II.

   After World War II, the United States defended the borders of Western Europe nations against that ``evil empire'' of the Soviet Union and Soviet Communism. In fact, we still have troops in Western Europe. Sixty years later, we still defend those borders. And that is a long time. Then there was the Korean War. In its aftermath with 50,000 Americans killed, we fulfilled our commitment to defend South Korea, and we still have 30,000 troops on that border with North Korea, 50 years plus defending someone else's border. We defend the borders of Iraq and part of the Balkans even to this day.

   But Madam Speaker, I wonder why we don't have the same commitment to America's borders? Doesn't that bother anyone? Having been to the southern border of the United States numerous times and seeing the ``Maginot Line of Indifference,'' I am puzzled why we seem to ignore the thousands of trespassers, or invaders, if I can use that term, that come from all nations and cross our border without permission.

   When Mexico invaded the United States at Brownsville, Texas, in 1846, we went to war to defend the southern border. When the outlaw, now folk hero, General Pancho Villa and his bandits came into the United States from Mexico to commit crimes in New Mexico, the United States sent General Blackjack Pershing to go after him, even if it meant going to Mexico.

   That was during a time when our sovereignty was important to the Nation and to the Federal Government. But the invasion now is much worse. Some estimates put the number of illegals in the United States between 15 and 35 million people. Why don't we have the same moral resolve we had in World War II and Korea to defend our borders from this stealth invasion? It is the duty of government to protect the citizens of this Nation and the States.

   I will read from the Constitution, something we probably ought to do more of in this Congress. Article IV section 4 of the United States Constitution says, ``The United States shall guarantee to every State in this union a Republican Form of Government and shall protect each of them against invasion.'' Invasion means intrusion or encroachment. Why doesn't the Government just simply follow the Constitution and prevent invasion into the United States?

   Now some Chamberlain appeasers want to just tell the illegals they can stay. After all, we can use the cheap plantation labor, the appeasers say. Never mind the crimes some of them commit, never mind how they take some social services without paying for them, never mind how some live off Americans and lawful immigrants. Never mind it is illegal to be in the United States without permission.

   So why, Madam Speaker, do we defend the borders of other nations but not our own? The Feds say they are trying. But the proof, or the lack of it, is in the results. The border with Mexico is violent. The border is porous, and the border is being invaded. The most powerful nation in the history of the world can stop the secret invasion if it first had the moral resolve to do so, and second, the courage to do whatever is necessary to stop the onslaught of invaders.

   Maybe we should even use the National Guard or returning troops from Iraq on our southern border. But doing so would take leadership that is committed in word and deed to protecting the sovereignty of this Nation.

   The United States is worth it, Madam Speaker, even if the amnesty crowd and Mexican President Calderon doesn't like it.

   And that's just the way it is.