mr. chairman , i rise in support of h.r. 418 .  twenty-six years ago , when i first came to this chamber , we were speaking about border security .  sixteen years ago , when i left this chamber , we were speaking about border security ; and here we are again .  a fundamental aspect of national sovereignty is that a nation is able to control its own borders .  the nature of this requirement is of particular importance in the post-9/11 environment in which we must all live .  in years past , when those of us on the subcommittee on immigration confronted this challenge , there were traffickers and human cargo and narcotics and the increasing problem of criminal gangs who profit from such enterprises .  today , however , we must deal with the additional worry that these channels of illicit commerce may also include those who enter our country to kill innocent americans and the related concerns of weapons of mass destruction .  the real id act , introduced by the gentleman from wisconsin ( chairman sensenbrenner ) , is an important step in meeting this challenge .  in conjunction with the additional border patrol positions authorized by this body at the close of the last congress , h.r. 418 will remove the impediments to completing the fence along the san diego corridor of our southern border .  i want to commend my predecessor in the third congressional district in california , mr. doug ose , who worked hard to remove the regulatory obstacles to completion of the fence .  in today 's post-9/11 environment , it is one component in an integrated u.s. border security system .  there is simply no excuse for the failure to complete the remaining 3 1/2 miles of the security fence .  the language offered by our colleague from wisconsin would allow us to do so .  in our system of governance , the united states government and specifically the congress have given us what is tantamount to plenary jurisdiction over immigration law .  as a former attorney general in my state , i can make the observation that in most areas of the law enforcement , the states and local governments have primary jurisdiction .  that is not the case with immigration enforcement .  as a former president of the other party put it in a different context , `` the buck stops here. '' although i am a committed believer in federalism , the nature of the task and the language of article i , section 8 , are clear .  while this bill in no way preempts state law with respect to the issuance of driver 's licenses , it does entail a modest notion that the immigration laws enacted by this body ought to mean something .  