Congressional Record, Volume 153 Issue 91 (Thursday, June 7, 2007)

[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 91 (Thursday, June 7, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7313-S7322]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

IMMIGRATION REFORM

Mr. REID. Mr. President, this has been a very difficult time. I think
there has been a lot of bending over backward to accommodate people who
have wanted to offer amendments. Initially, as you will recall, the
negotiators were given quite a bit of time, and then when that ``quite
a bit of time left,'' they wanted another week and they got that.
After the debate started, the majority leader said, this is a 2-week
bill, and it is. I extended debate past the recess. During the floor
debate, we have disposed of 42 amendments, including 28 rollcall votes.
Last night we asked for consent to move the cloture vote from this
morning to tonight so we could have another full day of amendments.
That didn't work out.
I understand why some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle
thought maybe that wasn't a good idea. But I thought we could, after
cloture was not invoked this morning, move some other amendments. We
tried hard to do that. We were unable to do that. I tried every
possible way to get amendments up today; every possible way.
A real short recounting of this. I offered votes on eight amendments,
four on each side. Then we tried six, three on each side. Again, my
friends on the other side of aisle objected to that. Then I tried three
Republican amendments, only two Democratic amendments. That was
objected to by my colleagues on the other side.
Finally, I tried to get a significant number of additional amendments
pending so they could receive votes after cloture. That was objected
to. Republicans even objected to calling up their own amendments.
So having spent all day trying to diligently work out a way to vote
on Republican and Democratic amendments and facing objections from my
Republican colleagues, I found the only thing we can do is try to get
cloture tonight.
I was hoping my friends on the other side of the aisle would
understand that small groups shouldn't dictate what

[[Page S7314]]

happens around here, but that is what happened.
But I, even though disappointed, look forward to passing this bill.
We are going to take the bill off the Senate floor, as I just
indicated and we have done. But there are ways we can do this. There
could be an agreement of a number of amendments. I am saying to
everyone here, I would do my very best to have more Republican
amendments than Democratic amendments. I know some of my colleagues
don't want me to say that, but I would be willing to do that, with a
time certain for passing this bill. Hopefully, we can do that in the
next several weeks. There is a lot of support for this bill on the
outside. The problem was on the inside of the Senate Chamber.
People have worked very hard on this bill. One of my colleagues in my
office today, who has worked on this bill so hard, shed some tears.
This is a bill about which people have a lot of emotion.
I have to acknowledge that my first reaction was, look how many votes
they gave us, six or seven. All the Democrats could have voted for
cloture--and we did, all but 10--and we still couldn't have gotten
cloture. That was my reaction, to be upset. But there is no reason to
be upset. I think we have to look toward passing this bill. It is
something that needs to be done. There are some really good things in
this bill. The DREAM Act--I will not belabor the point, but I will just
briefly say that in Smith Valley, NV, a little mining community, a
number of years ago, this beautiful child came up to me, a senior in
high school. I knew she wanted to talk to me, and she did. She said: I
am the smartest kid in my class. I can't go to college. My parents are
illegal. What am I going to do, Senator? She couldn't do anything. I
don't know what she is doing now. She is a grown woman, probably
working on the onion farms in Smith Valley. Maybe she got married. I
don't know what happened to her. She should have been able to go to
college. We had a provision in this bill to allow people like that
young lady to go to college.
A young man in Reno, NV, a small-in-stature Hispanic--he would be the
master of ceremonies at events. He could sing. He could talk. It took
me a number of years to realize he was in the country but he had bad
papers. He couldn't drive a car. I haven't seen him for a number of
years, don't know what has happened to him. He couldn't go to college.
Under this legislation which is now no longer on the Senate floor, he
could have had a pathway to legalization. He already knew English. He
spoke better English than I do. Get a job, pay taxes, stay out of
trouble--I am confident he would do that--pay some penalties and some
fines to go to the back of the line, to be able to come out of the
shadows, get the ability to drive a car. But we are not going to be
able to do that for him now.
I have every desire to complete this legislation. We all have to
work--the President included--to figure out a way to get this bill
passed. I am a creature of the Senate. I understand we live by the
rules that govern this body. A small number of people can disturb what
goes on here. My disappointment--and I have expressed this to Senator
McConnell--is I wish more of my colleagues on the other side of the
aisle had in effect thumbed their nose at a few of these people and
voted for cloture, at least giving us more votes than what we got. It
didn't happen. There are personal reasons for doing that. I accept
that. But in my office, about 7 o'clock tonight, a number of we
Democratic Senators met there and made a commitment to each other that
we are going to do everything we can to pass this bill as soon as we
can. When is that? I don't know. But we are going to work hard. We are
going to try to put aside the hurt feelings we have and move on with
the anticipation that this bill is something the country needs, and the
Senate needs to do this. I hope we can figure out a way to do so.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Pryor). The Republican leader.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, my good friend the majority leader and
I frequently are on opposite sides of issues and fighting to a draw
occasionally. But on the matter we are dealing with tonight, both of us
desire the same result, which is to get a bipartisan immigration bill
that would be an improvement over the disastrous status quo we have on
this important issue in America today. The utility, however, of a great
many cloture votes, particularly when you don't succeed, is that it
doesn't produce results.
I had indicated to my good friend the majority leader at the
beginning of this debate that we needed--``we'' meaning this side of
the aisle--to have roughly the same number of Republican rollcall votes
on this bill this year that we had the last time we brought it up. Now
I think we were very close to getting there. My advice to my good
friend on the other side was to not have this vote we just had tonight.
I didn't believe I could support cloture at this point, although I
certainly could at some point, provided we had enough votes on the
amendments for which there was a demand on our side of the aisle. But
we were not there yet. We could have finished this bill in a couple of
more days, in my judgment.
Frankly, we have had too many cloture votes this year to get
successful results. This is the 37th cloture vote we have had this
year. By this point in the 109th Congress, we had had 13. By this point
in the 108th Congress, we had had nine. By this point in the 107th
Congress, we had had two. So my suggestion on a bill like this which
does enjoy bipartisan support is to meet the threshold of
acceptability, to get enough support over here to get to final passage.
I think we are giving up on this bill too soon. I like what I think I
heard the majority leader say, that he doesn't want to give up on it
either. I think we are within a few days of getting to the end of what
many would applaud as an important bipartisan accomplishment of this
Congress. I encourage the majority leader to return to this issue in
the near future. I doubt if the prospects will get better with the
passage of time. There are a number of Republicans who are prepared to
vote for cloture as soon as they believe their colleagues on this side
of the aisle have had a reasonable opportunity to have offered and
voted upon amendments they think would improve the bill. I don't think
that is asking for too much.
I would be happy to commit tonight to the majority leader to continue
to work with him to try to finish this bill at the earliest possible
time. Obviously, it is his decision to decide when we go back to it. My
advice would be to do that sometime soon. In the meantime, we will
still be working with people on this side of the aisle to try to winnow
down the number of amendments that really seem to need a rollcall vote
and be prepared to try to work on this again at whatever point the
majority leader decides to return to the measure.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, the distinguished Republican leader has laid
out the problem: We are very close. At some point, we will be ready to
vote for cloture. We need more votes on amendments, even though we have
had more than on the bill last year. We are getting close to being
prepared to vote for cloture. We have spent so much time on this bill
trying to make people happy whom you couldn't make happy on this bill
anyway. They had no intention of voting for the bill, voting for
cloture. But we spent an inordinate amount of time----
Mr. McCONNELL. Will the leader yield on that point?
Mr. REID. Mr. President, in a brief minute.
I want the right tone set here. I don't want this to be an
adversarial process. This is not a battle between Reid and McConnell.
The votes show what happened. It doesn't take Einstein to figure that
one out. Republicans didn't vote for cloture. They hadn't had enough.
What is enough? I don't know what is enough.
One of the elements that hasn't been mentioned here tonight--but only
in passing, because I want to set the right tone--this is the
President's bill. Last year, we passed the Democratic immigration bill.
We passed it with help from some courageous Republicans. Here, part of
those courageous Republicans met with some very strong Democratic
Senators, working with Cabinet officers, to come up with a bill. They
came up with a bill. The press has declared this to be the grand
compromise. I accept that term. Where are

[[Page S7315]]

the President's men? Where are the President's people helping us with
these votes?
We are finished with this for the time being. As we have been for
days, we are going to have a list for you right away. We should have it
by 5 o'clock tonight. We will have it for you in the morning. We are
very close. At some point, we are going to do this. Pretty soon, we
will have enough votes so we can support cloture. We are prepared to
vote for cloture but not right now.
I want to finish this bill, but I can't do it alone. We can't do it
alone. We did more than our share here tonight on cloture votes. We
picked up seven votes during the day from the vote this morning to the
vote this evening. But we need some help. I would hope the President
understands that it is only going to be about 16 months until there is
an election for a new President, either a Democratic or Republican
President. He has a relatively short period of time to help us with
this piece of legislation.
People know I am very concerned about what comes up on the floor. I
am very time-conscious with what needs to be done. I am not always
right, and I acknowledge that. But no one can take away from the fact
that I try to get as much as we can out of this Senate. I am going to
continue to do that. Part of the time I want to make sure we are able
to add into the picture is time to do an immigration bill, but we over
here can't do it alone. We need some help. We have an opportunity, as I
said before. We want this number of amendments, and we are not going to
go for 34. I heard that one yesterday. But whatever it is--10, 6, 5, 4,
3, a time for final passage--we will find time to get this bill up. If
they--meaning the other side--have another idea how to get it done, we
will work with them. We want to pass this bill. We are committed to
immigration reform. We believe our country needs it, not only for the
people who live in this country but people outside the country who
recognize we have the ability to solve our own problems. Immigration is
a problem. We are committed to work on it. And we will continue to do
that. I hope for the good of this country we can move forward in a
positive manner and pass this legislation.

I say again, let's have President Bush work with us. I want to work
with him. You do not hear that from me very often. I will do whatever I
can to have this part of his legacy, his immigration bill. I want no
credit for it. No one else wants any credit for it. It can be his bill
because if we pass this, there is credit to go around for everybody.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Republican leader.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, this is a complicated bill, but the key
to passage is not complicated. Let me say again what I have been saying
for 2 weeks. There is a demand on this side of the aisle to have
roughly the same number of Republican rollcall votes that we had when
we took up this bill in the last Congress.
Now, my good friend, the majority leader, keeps referring to Members
on our side of the aisle who are not going to vote for the bill under
any circumstances, and there are a number of those on our side of the
aisle. But they are not the key to getting cloture. It is the rest of
us.
Let me be perfectly clear about it. What I am saying is, the rest of
us who would like to be able to vote for cloture and would like to see
us pass a bill are going to insist that the others of our colleagues--
whether they vote for or against the bill in the end--have a chance to
have roughly the same number of rollcall votes we had before.
It is not complicated. It is a very complicated bill, but the key to
getting it passed is not complicated. We are not that far away from
being able to get cloture on a bill. And the people like myself, who,
if this procedural hurdle of getting an adequate number of rollcall
votes is met, are going to vote for cloture would probably be able to
bring enough of our colleagues along to get cloture on the bill.
That is why I advise my good friend to give it a couple more days.
That is why I also advise him--right now, again, tonight--if he is
going to turn back to this bill, I would not wait a whole long time to
do it. It strikes me that it ought to be done sometime in the near
future. If we can get this reasonable number of additional rollcall
votes, I think there is an overwhelming likelihood of cloture on the
measure and a bipartisan accomplishment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, keep in mind the logic of this. It has been
made graphically clear to me that the Republicans wanted more votes on
their amendments. One problem: They objected to bringing up their own
amendments. It makes it a little tough to vote on them. It is like
having a basketball tournament where you have the five players on each
side, and they are going to have a tournament, and the winner is the
team with the most points, but--one problem--nobody will supply a
basketball. That is what we had here.
The logic of the statement of my friend from Kentucky leaves me
without a lot of understanding. They want more amendments. We did
everything we could to have amendments today. I will go through it
again. We started out with eight. They objected to it. Six, five; they
objected every time. We said: Do you want more amendments pending? Here
they are. We will give you six or eight. Objection.
So we know where we are. But let's realize where we are and not make
up the facts. The real true facts: We wanted to give the Republicans
votes on amendments. Voice votes did not count. It had to be rollcall
votes. And I accepted that. But we could not get any kind of votes
because we could not get amendments up--not for our fault.
So, Mr. President, I do not want to leave this floor tonight without
stating how much I admire and appreciate seven courageous Republicans
who did the right thing. They know what went on here in the last few
days is wrong. They voted for cloture tonight. I am confident that
others will join them in the future, if we have to do cloture again.
But everyone--everyone--should acknowledge that what these seven
Senators did was not easy. It is an act of courage that they did this.
While my compliments for them may not be very much, when the history
books are written, this will be a profile in courage for their doing
this tonight. I am convinced that is true. I admire them and appreciate
what they did, setting an example.
I think we have all said enough, but I want to get the last word. So
if people want to say more, I will--
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Republican leader.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, then I want to express my admiration
for the 12 Democrats who voted against cloture for being profiles in
courage.
Look, the point is, it is quite simple. We all know how to get
cloture. It is to have enough Republican rollcall votes, as I have
repeatedly told my good friend from Nevada over the last 2 weeks. At
whatever point we want to turn back to the bill and meet that threshold
requirement, I think there is an overwhelming likelihood of getting
cloture and moving forward.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, last word--I hope. You cannot have votes on
amendments that people do not let you bring up to vote on. There is no
basketball, remember. We have a game going but no basketball.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, this vote was obviously a disappointment.
I think those of us who have worked on this issue are encouraged by
what both leaders have stated, that we are not giving up or forgetting
this legislation, and we have every intention of ultimately finalizing
and getting a bill.
Tonight we cannot look away from what is happening on the southern
borders that are open to the kind of vandalism that has taken place,
the exploitation which has taken place. We cannot look out at our
broken immigration system and think we can let that continue. We cannot
look away from so many locations across this country where people who
are undocumented are being exploited--dangerously exploited--
dehumanized.
We cannot look away from those who have worked in the agribusinesses
of this country and had real hope we were going to take action in the
Senate, where we have worked for years and years and years in order to
get legislation through, which 67 Members of this Senate have
cosponsored. Their dreams are dashed this evening.

[[Page S7316]]

We cannot look away from the 12.5 million people out across America
who tonight, after finding out what has failed to happen in the Senate,
know they are going home to their children, and know tonight their fear
is enhanced and increased because we have failed to take action.
Sure, they broke the law, but they broke the law because they wanted
to work, work, work. They wanted to provide for their families. They
wanted to provide for their children. They wanted to work. And 70,000
permanent resident aliens have served in the military in Iraq, in
Afghanistan. They wanted to be part of the American dream.
Well, I think as both leaders have stated, doing nothing is not an
alternative. It is not an alternative. This issue is not going away.
And I leave this evening actually encouraged by what both leaders have
stated. Most of all, I am encouraged by the spirit which I have seen in
the Senate among Republicans as well as a number of our colleagues who
believe we have a real responsibility to accept the challenge of both
of our leaders and find a way we can secure a fair and just immigration
bill.
It is in that spirit that I hope those who have been involved in this
will continue to work so we are going to have a constructive
resolution. No bill at all is not a solution.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I have a sense of wonderment as to what
the American people are thinking about what has just transpired in the
Senate, if there are any people watching on C-SPAN 2.
This is reputed to be the world's greatest deliberative body. But to
listen to the debate for the last several days, and to the speeches
here this evening, I think people wonder just what is going on.
We worked through the immigration issue in the last Congress, in the
Judiciary Committee, and extensively produced a committee bill. We came
to the floor and passed a bipartisan bill.
This year, we chose a different course. As I have said before, I
think it was probably a mistake not to go through the committee
process. But we crafted a bill, bipartisan. About a dozen Senators sat
through tedious, laborious hours to construct a bill. As of this
moment, we have not succeeded. But I believe we will yet succeed.
We have faced a very difficult issue. We know our borders are porous.
We have constructed a way to do our utmost to stop people from coming
in illegally. We know the United States is a great magnet, and we have
structured a way that employers can find out who is legal and who is
not legal. We have crafted a way, with a guest worker program, to
provide for the labor needs of the United States and have structured a
way to deal with the 12 million undocumented immigrants as best we
could.
Accusations have been made it is amnesty. But the fact is, if we do
nothing, it is silent amnesty. The 12 million undocumented immigrants
will stay here. And the alternative to amnesty--if amnesty it is; and I
do not think it is because we have done everything we can to construct
the factor of earned right to citizenship, with fines, payment of back
taxes, learning English, holding a job, contributing to our society--
but the alternative to amnesty--if it is; and I repeat it is not--is
anarchy, which is what we have now.
I believe the central point ought to be understood by anyone who is
watching C-SPAN 2 that this matter is on life support, but it is not
dead, it is not morbid, and ultimately we will produce a list of
amendments. We will satisfy those on the Republican side of the aisle
who want to vote for amendments. There is no obligation on the part of
any Senator who offers an amendment to be committed to vote for the
bill. The bill could be improved by those who are opposed to it. But
whatever is the case, they have a right to offer amendments.
Ultimately, we will satisfy that interest.
I voted for cloture tonight because I think the Democrats were wrong
but the Republicans were ``wronger''--to use a word which does not
exist. But we will return to this issue because it is too important for
America not to improve the status quo.
We are still open for business on this bill. If anybody has a better
idea on how to deal with the borders, let's hear it; to deal with the
employers, let's hear it; to deal with the 12 million undocumented
immigrants, let's hear it; to provide a workforce, let's hear it.
One thing I do take difference with my colleagues who have been
opposed to the bill--on both sides--they have not come forward with an
alternative. I had a discussion with one of the leaders of the
opposition who is dead set against this bill today about what would he
suggest. He did not have a suggestion. He is still thinking about it.
Well, there has been a lot of time to think about it. We tackled this
bill more than 2 years ago in the Judiciary Committee, which I chaired,
and it is time that the dissenters came up with something as an
alternative, just not be naysayers.
But I am glad to hear what Senator Reid has said and Senator
McConnell has said about the determination to produce a bill yet, and I
think we will return to it. We will yet earn our title as the world's
greatest deliberative body.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Colorado.
Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I want to make a few comments about the
legislation we have been working on so hard. The overall comment I want
to make is, failure on this issue is simply not an option. Failure is
not an option. The people of America deserve the Congress to resolve
this issue because of the very important values that are at stake.
I want to say, first, before I make some other comments, that we
would not be here, frankly, if it had not been for the leadership of
Majority Leader Reid in setting aside this time for us to debate this
issue of such national significance. So I appreciate him and all the
leadership he has provided in this effort.
I also appreciate the leadership of both my Democratic and Republican
colleagues who have worked hard on this issue for the last 4, 5 months.
Indeed, it has been more than a 4- or 5-month debate and
struggle. Indeed, it has been more than a 4- or 5-month debate. We were
on this floor for a month last year casting some 30, 35 rollcall votes,
and we have been on this issue now for the last several weeks. We had a
warning it was coming up. But there has been a lot of work that has
gone into this legislation. It is my hope, with the sense of optimism
expressed by my good friend, Senator Kennedy from Massachusetts, that
Senator Reid and Senator McConnell will lead us to some resolution of
this issue.

I want to say a quick word about why I don't think failure is an
option. I don't think anybody here ought to be saying the immigration
reform package is dead, because it isn't. It isn't. We are very close
to coming up with legislation that will address the fundamental values
we have been trying to address from the very beginning. In my mind, I
want to say what I believe some of those fundamental values are.
First and foremost, we have to fix our borders. We have a system of
broken borders in this country where people come across the border and
we don't know who is coming into this country. We don't know who is
coming into this country. In a post-9/11 world, that is absolutely
unacceptable.
We also have a broken immigration system within the country, because
when people come into the country, we don't know where they are and we
do know that many of them overstay their visas. Forty percent, fifty
percent of the people come into the country legally and simply overstay
their visas. How can we have a system of national security when we
don't know where these people are? So national security compels us to
make sure that we get to a solution, and that is why failure is not an
option.
Secondly, there are significant aspects to this legislation. I look
at the great work Senator Dianne Feinstein and Senator Larry Craig have
done with respect to AgJOBS, a piece of legislation that has been
almost a decade in crafting. I know about the fruit that rots in places
in California. I know about the agricultural disaster problems we have
in many places across our country, including my State of Colorado.
AgJOBS is an important part of

[[Page S7317]]

the legislation. People and organizations, both Republican-leaning
organizations and Democratic-leaning organizations, from the United
Farm Workers to the Farm Bureau of America, and others, want us to pass
this legislation because it included AgJOBS. Today, the farmers and
ranchers of America ought to be saying to this Senate and to the
leaders of this Senate that they want this bill and they want to get it
done as soon as we possibly can.
Third, there are moral issues that frankly ought to guide us in
dealing with some of these issues that are so important to our country.
Sure, there are 12.5 million people who came here to America and they
came here to work and to live the American dream. Tonight, many of
those people live in fear not knowing what is going to happen to them,
not knowing what is going to happen to their families the next day.
Because they broke the law, we said in this compromise, in this piece
of legislation we put together, that we were going to have them pay a
fine. We were going to punish them. That is what we do in America all
the time. We pass laws in this body. The Presiding Officer and I served
as attorneys general for a long period of time, and what we do is when
people break the law, we punish them. So we created a system here that
provided punishment to people by requiring them to pay a fine.
We also in this legislation require that they pay fees, impact fees.
We require them to pay other kinds of fees. So this was not what some
of those people from places around the country have said is an amnesty
bill. This was a bill that put people into probation and into purgatory
where over a period of time, over a period of 8 years--you wait for 8
years and at the end of 8 years, if you do the time, if you pay the
fine, if you stay crime free, if you learn English, you go to the back
of the line, you meet all of those requirements, then--then--you become
eligible for a green card. So what we crafted was a bill that was in
fact a workable bill.
Having said all of that, I think the aim here still is to address
those very important strategic interests of the United States of
America, and I do not believe failure is an option. I believe that the
Democrats, working with the Republicans, can still move forward to find
legislation that will address the imperative of fixing our broken
borders and our lawless immigration system which we currently have in
America.
The last thing I want to say again is the best of times, frankly, for
me in the Senate have been when Democrats and Republicans came together
to solve the problems of our country. The issue of immigration isn't a
Republican issue or a Democratic issue; it is an issue that is an
American issue. If we are going to solve an issue that is as difficult
as this very contentious issue for America, it is going to take
Republicans coming over and working with the Democrats so we can get
cloture on the bill, so we can get whatever amendments crafted that are
not the poison pills some would try to offer, and we can get that done.
I have confidence. I have confidence in my Democratic colleagues as
well as my Republican colleagues that we can live up to the optimism--
we can live up to the optimism Senator Reid shared with us here
tonight.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Klobuchar). The Senator from Arizona is
recognized.
Mr. KYL. Madam President, I wish to share in the comments of my
colleagues who have spoken in favor of this legislation in expressing
concern that we were not able to proceed tonight to the final steps for
its consideration, but also to express appreciation to the majority
leader and others who have expressed a willingness to continue to
ensure that legislation can move forward as quickly as possible.
We should not here this evening cast any blame for our failure to
move it forward tonight. In a sense, all of us who were supporters
didn't do a good enough job of ensuring all of the process could occur
that Members properly insist on in order to vindicate their rights to
debate and have amendments to get the job done. By the same token,
those who oppose the bill need to appreciate that at a certain point,
there is adequate consideration of their amendments.
The majority leader expressed this evening the view that we hadn't
quite reached that point. And reluctantly, because of that, I joined
those who decided to vote to keep the debate moving forward, which at
this point means the majority leader has, at least temporarily, set it
aside. But it shouldn't be too hard to get about a dozen amendments of
Members considered. That is why I say we all share some responsibility,
because that shouldn't have been that hard of a task. I hope our
leadership will ensure that once we get that list available and ready
for consideration, we can quickly take up the legislation again and
finish it in this body so it can move forward to the other side.
I am not going to talk about the substance of the legislation
tonight. I do want to thank those who worked so hard on its behalf on
both sides of the aisle. The Senator from Colorado who has just spoken
was an incredible inspiration in getting it done. The work Senator
Kennedy did throughout this effort to ensure that he drove us to a
conclusion that was one that didn't satisfy anyone 100 percent, but
which all of us at the end of the day found we were able to support--
without his leadership, it wouldn't have been possible. My colleague
from California, Senator Feinstein, with whom I have worked on so many
things, made some very difficult decisions and in that, as always, I
respect the way she provided her leadership. On our side, colleagues
such as Senator Mel Martinez, who is on the floor now, my colleague
John McCain from Arizona, Lindsey Graham, and Senator Specter who
spoke, and all of the others who helped so much on this legislation, we
are committed to seeing it through to the end. Another one of our
colleagues on the Democratic side, Senator Cantwell, who also was a
help in moving part of this along, said this is a marathon, and she is
right. We are not quite to the finish, but we are going to finish.
I know there are those out in America who think this is not a good
bill. If you want to criticize the bill, there are a hundred ways to do
it. I could point out all the flaws, and there are plenty. But you
cannot solve big problems without trying. We have tried hard. We have
produced an imperfect product, but a product that is the best to come
along yet. In the amendment process we can make it better, and in the
rest of the legislative process, hopefully, we can approve it. Hearing
from the American people, we have put many of their suggestions into
the mix here to help improve it. But if we don't try, this problem that
has bedeviled us for years will continue.
As so many others have said, failure is not an option. We have a big
problem in this country that needs solving, and I respect those who
have put their shoulder to the wheel to solve it in the face of great
opposition and misunderstanding in some respects from some of our
constituents. But if you don't try, you don't reach these tough
solutions. We came here to solve the tough problems.
I will conclude with comments that have always inspired me by Teddy
Roosevelt, who was not afraid to get in a dusty arena and fight it out.
He said the thing he most appreciated about his opportunities in life
was the opportunity to work on work worth doing. This is work worth
doing.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California is recognized.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Madam President, I wanted to say a few words because
for me, this is a very sad day. I had hoped the outcome would be very
different. I too want to thank my colleagues.
Earlier this evening, I happened to listen to the gray-haired Senator
from Massachusetts speak and I think he probably spoke for an hour
without a note. It was a lesson in immigration and a lesson on this
bill. I think he knows more and has worked harder and worked longer--
not months, but decades--on these issues. So, Ted Kennedy, I want you
to know I have the deepest respect and feeling for you, and I am so
sorry this day ended the way it did.
But to my other colleagues: Senator Kyl, Senator Martinez, who is
here, Senator Salazar, Senator Menendez, Senator Specter, Senator
Graham, all of those people who came to the hot rooms and sat around a
table and put forward something they hoped could be bipartisan and
could pass, I think we

[[Page S7318]]

all know the fact is that any immigration bill has to get 60 votes.
Therefore, it is not going to be a Democratic immigration bill and it
is not going to be a Republican immigration bill; it is going to be a
bipartisan bill.
Having said that, when you deal with one word, which is
``comprehensive,'' which means all encompassing, you have to deal with
a system that is huge. A visa system by the millions, a broken border,
interior enforcement, employer sanctions, all of those things you need
to do to fix a system that has existed are broken.
Someone said earlier today: What we have now today in America is
effectively amnesty, because people know you can't pick up and deport
12 million people. You can't hold 12 million people. Therefore, what
develops is a kind of subterranean, fearful culture that never becomes
healthy and part of the main culture of America, and it is so too bad,
because it doesn't have to be that way. I think those of us who see
that, who looked at the comprehensive picture, who struggled between a
Democratic ideology and a Republican ideology and to put those things
together that we could put together in virtually every area of
immigration reform, found that indeed it was a difficult task. We also
found another thing: that there are very strong feelings in this
country; and secondly, this bill was misunderstood from the very day it
was brought out on the floor. In many different ways, it was
misreported. It is still being misreported to this very day.
People never have understood the complexities of the bill. For
example, if you sunset the point system after 5 years, you essentially
say that agricultural workers can't get green cards because they have
to wait for 8 years, or Z visas can't get green cards because you have
to wait for 8 years. The agreement was that in exchange for being able
to bring people out of the shadows, to put them through the hoops of
becoming legal--not amnesty--oh, and I must tell my colleagues, my hair
goes up every time somebody calls it amnesty, because there are all
kinds of hoops they must jump through, and they must show a dedication
to the country, and they must work and they must pay a fine, and they
must learn the language, and they have to do this over a substantial
period of time. They have to work to hold their visa. There is a
probationary period. They have to submit documents. Some people thought
it was too strong, but the fact is, we had a workable program. The
exchange for the Republicans for doing that was two things: the guest
worker program, and 8 years down the pike, 8 years down, changing the
family basis to a nuclear family for green cards--a nuclear family
being a mother, a father, and minor children, with additional green
cards to move people faster through, with hardship green cards where
there was a hardship. I wish to share this with the Senator from
Florida, and other Senators who are here, that with every amendment put
on the floor, it drove the sides not closer together but further apart.
I watched as we sat here late last night. I saw that as the discussion
of amendments went on, we lost Members. It was unfortunate because much
of it was not on correct information.

I hope people will take a look at this bill. There may be some
decision made that comprehensive, all inclusive is too much to tackle
in one bill, that perhaps we should do parts of this bill at a time.
This has been a very hard time for those of us who believe we had a
product that had a chance to stand the test of time. We have a failing
system out there today. Even if we got 25 percent better, it would be
better than it is today. We could offer hope for people. We could see
they are put in a constructive venue. We could see that enforcement is
what it should be. We would put the money into the guarantee of the
enforcement. We would use modern electronics to improve employer
sanctions. Everybody would have an identification card. We have all
these people in this country and we don't know who they are. What kind
of a national security risk is that? Answer: It is a big one. We have
people coming across all the time. This is a way to know who everybody
is in the United States.
So there were so many things in this bill that were good. Sure, there
are things I don't like and that Senator Durbin didn't like and that
Mel Martinez didn't like and Senator Salazar didn't like and a lot Jeff
Sessions didn't like. There were even things Ted Kennedy didn't like.
But the point is we have a system that is not functional and that is
serving no purpose and is using taxpayer dollars without producing the
kinds of efficiencies it should. This is what we tried to solve in this
bill.
I thought it was a good bill. I thought we could, in conference, work
out some of the problems. I guess my observation of the evening is: Is
comprehensive too much? Secondly, do people not want a bill so much
that they are going to put amendments on this floor that don't bring
people together, only divide them further?
In terms of deal breakers--my last point--there was one on each side.
We survived that. There was one for each side. Yet there was nothing
that could not be remedied in a conference. The achievements, I
thought, would have been so strong and our situation so much improved.
I hope people will read the bill, look at it, understand how these visa
programs would work, understand how the security in this country would
be improved by passing it, understand how we can--I have always
believed we could control our borders. If we have the will, there will
be a way. This was the will and the way to do that.
So it is a dark day for me and a dark evening because a lot of work
went into this. I don't think we should give up. I think we should come
back to fight another day. I know we will. To everybody, beginning with
Ted, Ken, Mel, Dick, and for those Republicans who had the courage in
particular to vote yes on cloture, I am very grateful. I think if there
were a few more of you, we may have been able to do this tonight. We
will come back. I thank everybody.
I thank the Chair and I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida is recognized.
Mr. MARTINEZ. Madam President, I share in the disappointment of the
evening with the Senator from California. I have been a part of this
process, and I never thought in my first days as a Senator that
immigration would be one of the signature issues I would deal with.
However, it is one I will not shrink from and one I will continue to do
all I can to see that we tackle this difficult problem our Nation faces
and do something about it.
It would be incredibly easy to walk away from this. In fact, we have
seen how easy it is to say ``amnesty'' and with that, satisfy one
responsibility toward solving a problem our country faces today. It is
easy to say this would not work, this is wrong, this isn't the right
bill, this is the wrong bill, this is a mistake, we should not do this.
What has been so ever-present to me is the lack of any constructive
solutions. I know now we are going to be in a hiatus, and those who
criticized this effort, I hope, will take the time and undertake the
responsibility of putting forth a proposal, advancing an idea, doing
something other than tearing down those who have put this together.
I don't believe we would have been hurt by one more day of debate. If
the bill is going to be brought back, it would have been easier to have
given it another day. I can also understand the exasperation and
anxiety by one who waited all day for amendments that didn't come. In
the blame game of Washington, there is plenty of blame to go around.
I remain committed to this because I believe we owe it to the
American people to tackle this very important problem. As I look at
what we must do and what is ahead, I am disappointed tonight not so
much for me but for those Americans who believe our borders need to be
safer. I am disappointed for those who have employees who may be
illegal and are looking for a tamperproof ID system that will help them
to know their workforce is a legal one. I am disappointed for those who
see the opportunity for the economy of our country to be improved and
made better by bringing in the best and the brightest under a points
system that would reward opportunity for companies to bring in people
we are not producing ourselves, but I hope we will produce in the
future. But today it is advantageous to us in this global

[[Page S7319]]

economy to bring people in from another part of the world to be a part
of this thriving, high-tech economy.
I am more disappointed for the families out there who are wondering
what is going to happen to them, how will this affect them--the people
who fix the cars, mow the lawns at a golf club, make the hotel beds in
central Florida, the people who clean the parks so that the next day
people can go in and enjoy a summer vacation day, the people who pump
the gas for them as they are leaving the park, the people who do
difficult construction and hot construction work that takes place in
the hot summer in Florida, the people who harvest the citrus crops, and
all those people who do all those services and jobs, who also have the
anxiety of wondering what is going to happen to them. Those are the
people who come to me and ask: Are you doing something about
immigration? What are you doing to help? Can you do something? Is it
going to happen? When? The Senate, with its long and storied history
today, bipartisanly, failed the American people. That is, plain and
simply, the way I see it. We have a chance to recover and recoup and
come back together to try again to bring this issue to a close and to
do something for the American people in a way that will bring honor to
this institution. I believe we need to lead because it is time to lead.

It is easy to lead on that which is easy; it is much harder to lead
on that which is difficult. I wish to say to the Senator from
Massachusetts how much I appreciated working with him. He has worked
hard. I also thank the diligent members of our staffs who have given
night and day to this effort. So I thank Senator Kennedy for his
participation in this effort. We have all learned from one another. I
certainly have been on the learning side of the curve from Senator Kyl,
who has now gone but who has been an inspiration to me through the way
in which he has handled this. I wish to simply say there was another
quote from Teddy Roosevelt about the man in the arena, but I will not
go through the quote. Those of us who are trial lawyers and have tasted
the verdict coming back the wrong way, we understand there are days
that don't go the way you want them to go. This was one of them. But
there is no statute of limitations and there is no final judgment.
We have an opportunity to come back another day and try again. I hope
it will not be long because I think the chances of this matter being
brought to a satisfactory conclusion are enhanced if we get back at it
sooner rather than later. The American people expect us to solve
problems. That is why they sent us here.
I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues on both sides
of the aisle so we can, at some point, do the work the American people
expect us to do on this very difficult issue.
I yield the floor.
Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, a number of us stayed on the floor this
evening long after the Senate finished its business on the immigration
bill. It is bittersweet to be here after all this effort and time, with
so little to show for it. I think the comments made since the decision
on the motion to end the debate was voted on have been constructive and
positive. I join in that spirit.
First, I acknowledge we learned an important lesson about the Senate,
a lesson that bears repeating so those who follow these proceedings
will understand what happened. The Senate is a different institution,
different than most city councils, different than the House of
Representatives, where I proudly served for 14 years. It is an
institution designed to protect the minority's points of view. It is an
institution that guarantees to every State, large and small, the same
number of Senators, and an institution which has honored and protected
the rights of the minority since its conception.
It was in 1916, if I am not mistaken, when President Woodrow Wilson
asked the Congress to pass a law to arm the Merchant Marine; with the
great world war about to begin, German U-boats were sinking American
merchant vessels. President Wilson wanted to stay out of the war, but
he wanted to protect our fleet. He asked the Congress for the authority
to arm the Merchant Marine, and it passed the House. It was stopped
cold in the Senate by one Senator, who in those days had the power to
stand and filibuster and, by that filibuster or debate, end the
possibility of enacting a bill into law. The American people responded
with outrage. The Senate was forced, for the first time in its history,
to create a way to stop this power of one Senator; so they invented the
motion known as the cloture motion, which we had tonight. They said it
would take 67, two-thirds of the Senate, to stop one Senator from
ending debate and stopping progress on a bill--67 votes.
It wasn't until many years later--almost 50 years--that the Senate
amended that and said it would only take 60 votes. This came up during
the civil rights debate. It was considered a great reform during that
era, and 60 votes became the standard for cloture. In other words,
three-fifths of the Senate would have to vote so any single Senator who
tried to stop a bill from progressing would be foreclosed, or closed
off with the cloture motion. That is the rule that applies today, some
40 years later. It is a rule we have lived under, and it is a rule we
tried to apply to this debate.
It was the belief of many that we had enough votes to pass this bill.
There were some who wanted to extend debate with more amendments and
more amendments, and many of us felt most of these amendments had run
their course and were repetitive, and the real ambition of those
offering amendments was not to improve the bill, or even challenge the
bill, but to stop the bill. So we tried, under the Senate rules, with
the cloture motion, to close off that debate and bring this matter to a
close. We fell short of that, despite our best efforts. The rollcall
this evening fell short, with a vote of 45 to 50. We needed 15 more
votes.
So what those who followed the debate saw this evening was an example
of what the Senate is about, why it was created, why it functions, and
the frustrating role it sometimes plays. The second thing those who
followed the debate saw was the continuing saga of immigration in
America. Almost from the first boat that landed in America, immigration
has been an issue. How many more people can this great Nation absorb?
What kind of people do we want to be our neighbors and future leaders
in this country? What kind of people can come here and make this a
better place? What kind of people would come here and perhaps make it
worse?
We have been engaged in this debate from the earliest days of this
country. There have been bitter chapters in this debate--chapters of
discrimination and prejudice against those who arrived, glorious
chapters when immigrants came and literally gave life to a country in
its infancy.
I said on the floor before, and I think at this moment it bears
repeating, I am one of those fortunate few. My grandmother and
grandfather immigrated to this country. They brought my mother, a 2-
year-old infant, from Lithuania and settled in East St. Louis, IL. They
lived an immigrant life, a spartan existence. They managed to survive.
They managed to prosper and raise a family. And the son of an immigrant
mother now stands as the 47th Senator in the history of the State of
Illinois. I am so proud of that, not for myself but for the fact that
it says a lot of good things about America and about immigration.
This debate evoked a lot of emotional responses. I say to my friend
Senator Salazar from Colorado, who is truly one of the most
extraordinary Senators--he brings his heart to this debate--when he
stands before us on issues such as the official language of America and
tells what it was like to be raised in a family that spoke Spanish and
to be faced with discrimination because of that heritage, it touches my
heart.
Of course, Senator Salazar and his family are not newcomers to the
United States. They were here centuries before my family arrived. I
think 500 years ago, if I am not mistaken, the Salazar family started
coming into this country, long before any settlers.
When I listen to Senator Salazar speak on these issues, I listen very
carefully because I know his voice is so important in this debate.
I listen to Senator Bob Menendez from New Jersey, a relative newcomer
to the Senate as well, but the man has made a real mark as a child of
immigrants to this country.

[[Page S7320]]

Senator Martinez, who spoke a moment ago, from the Republican side of
the aisle, is an immigrant to this country from Cuba.
America is a better place because of these three people and their
families. We know that. Immigration is why we are such a powerful and
great Nation. Our diversity is our strength. Those who cannot
understand that do not understand this country. Those who think the
nature of America is ``I am up, let's pull up the ladder,'' have lost
sight of why we are truly unique in this world's history, why many of
the things that divide other countries do not divide America, because
we have said to people: You are welcome in this country as long as you
are tolerant--tolerant of people of different colored skin, different
ethnic background, different accents, different religions. These are
what make us different. But in that difference is our strength.
Immigration is the reason America is as great as it is today, and the
detractors and critics have forgotten that.
I listened to Senator Reid, Senator Feinstein, and so many others as
they talked about this bill. There is one section in this bill that is
as close to my heart as any other section. It is the DREAM Act. I
decided to introduce the DREAM Act over 5 years ago. At the time I did,
a few members of my staff said: This is a serious mistake, Senator
Durbin. People will not like it, they will not understand it, they are
going to use it against you.
I disagreed. I believe the DREAM Act tells the story of America in
its proper form. The DREAM Act says if you are a child who came to
America before the age of 16, brought here by parents, and you are
undocumented, if you have lived in this country for 5 years, if you
graduate from high school, if you are prepared to either serve our
country in the military or to finish 2 years of college, we will give
you a chance to be an American citizen.
Why did I introduce this bill? Because, frankly, in my office in
Chicago and Springfield and all across the State of Illinois, most of
our work is on immigration. I introduced it because I met a young
woman, a Korean American who came here at the age of 2, whose family
did not file the papers, who learned much later in life when she
thought her star was going to soar that she had no country. Her mother
came to my office and said: What are we going to do about this little
girl? We never filed papers, Senator. Everybody in the house with her
is a citizen, but she is not. What can we do?
We went to our agencies of Government and said: What can we do for
this 18-year-old girl who has such a bright future, who has been
offered a music scholarship because of her skills on the piano? The
immigration office said: The answer is obvious: Send her back to Korea.
Send her back to Korea after 16 years of living in this country?
After 16 years of American dreams she was to be sent away? That is when
I wrote the DREAM Act. I said it isn't fair. It isn't fair for us to
talk about bringing any new people into America until we at least give
these children who should not be faulted for any shortcomings of their
parents a chance.
I salute all those involved in writing the bill we considered, S.
1348, because from the beginning, I was so honored that they came to me
and said this bill will not go forward unless the DREAM Act is
included. They worked hard on both sides of the aisle--Democrats and
Republicans--and the White House to include in this bill the DREAM Act.
I want to make a promise to those young men and women I still see
almost every time I return to my home State of Illinois: I won't quit
on you. I promise you I will continue this fight. We are going to pass
this law. You are going to get your chance, and you are going to make
this a better country. I made you that promise, and I am going to keep
it. It wasn't today, but it will be tomorrow. I want to keep that
promise. The DREAM Act will become the law of the land. Tens of
thousands of kids who are going to school now and are wondering what
the future could possibly hold, if you are undocumented and educated in
America, those kids are going to get a chance. That is what this
country has always been about.
I wish to say a word of praise to a handful of Senators on both sides
of the aisle.
On the Republican side of the aisle, there were some true profiles in
courage, as Senator Reid said. Arlen Specter stepped up and became a
real leader on this issue. I have disagreed with him in the past, and I
have agreed with him. But I have always respected this man. I watched
him day to day battling cancer, never missing a bell, coming to the
Senate Judiciary Committee and to the floor of the Senate, keeping up a
breakneck schedule, running his staff into the ground while he was
undergoing chemotherapy on the weekends. He is truly a man dedicated to
public service and brings a special talent to the job.
Jon Kyl of Arizona. The last time we considered immigration reform,
Jon Kyl was the harshest critic of immigration reform. When I heard he
was in on the negotiations, I thought: What is this all about? I
quickly learned. It was genuine. He was committed to trying to find a
bill. I didn't agree with Jon Kyl's approach in many areas, but I
respect the fact that his commitment was genuine and he tried up until
the very last minute to pass this bill.

Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. I watched the rollcall votes for
Lindsey Graham and thought many times how can he possibly do this? How
can he go home, maybe even face a Republican primary, and have the
courage to take these votes and cast them the way he has? But he did it
over and over again.
Mel Martinez of Florida, I mentioned earlier, from Cuba, wears two
hats, not only a Senator from the great State of Florida, but is
chairman of the Republican National Committee--chairman of the National
Republican Committee. He has been a true leader on this issue. I have
come to know Mel and respect him so much. He has told us in private
meetings with Senators the story of his life. I understand why the
issue means so much to him personally.
John McCain. John McCain has been kicked around for a lot of reasons.
He can take it. He is tough--a POW for over 5 years, a veteran of war.
He has been through a lot in his life. He stood up for this bill when
people wouldn't have had the courage to do so. I respect him for doing
that.
On the Democratic side, what can I say about Ted Kennedy? I am sorry
he has left. Maybe his staff or somebody watching will share my
feelings about him. It was 40 years ago I sat right up there as a
college student. It was 1968. I had heard Senator Bobby Kennedy, a
Senator from New York, was coming to the floor and was going to speak
out against the war in Vietnam. I waited for a long time until early
evening, and through those doors came Bobby Kennedy with his brother
Teddy Kennedy. He walked over and gave a speech on the Vietnam war. I
sat up there in awe of these two great men, Bobby Kennedy and Teddy
Kennedy. I looked down on them and said: I can't believe I am seeing
these giants in American history. I never thought I would see the day
when I would serve with Teddy Kennedy. He and I disagree from time to
time; that is expected in the Senate. But I never had but the greatest
admiration for his courage and leadership. This is a man who struggles
each day with a disability that might stop others but never stops him,
often in pain, often in discomfort. He comes to the floor every day. He
comes to the committee every day and fights with all of his heart for
what he believes in, and we saw it in this immigration battle.
Senator Dianne Feinstein, who was here a few moments ago, is a
terrific ally on these issues. She is truly looking for bipartisan
responses every step of the way, a practical solution, and never gives
up. Down in the well as we voted on the cloture motion, she didn't give
up the hope we might put together 60 votes. She walked around begging
Senators to vote. She is that kind of committed person.
I said a word about Senator Salazar, and I won't return to that
chapter other than to say he has been a major part of this debate. A
newcomer to the Senate, he has made his presence felt. I know he has
many years of contribution to this country and the State of Colorado he
represents so well.
Bob Menendez I mentioned earlier, Cuban background, another newcomer
to the Senate. Both he and Senator Salazar on the Democratic side of
the aisle are important voices in this debate from the Hispanic
community.
And finally, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, brand new to the Senate,

[[Page S7321]]

who is gaining in stature every single day, has been an important part
of this effort.
Those are the 10 who come to my mind who deserve special credit and
praise.
Let me say in closing, for those who may stand and argue we didn't
give them a chance to debate this bill, I think we did. I think we were
more than fair. Last year before cloture was invoked on the last
immigration bill, the Senate disposed of 30 amendments, 23 rollcall
votes. This year the Senate disposed of 42 amendments, not 30, 42
amendments, 28 rollcall votes. In the entire consideration of the
immigration bill last year, the Senate disposed of 44 amendments, only
2 more than we have already considered at this point in the debate.
I believe we did everything in our power to offer even more amendment
opportunities. I was here with Senator Reid today when he repeatedly
offered on the floor a chance to bring forward amendments, let's debate
them, let's vote on them, let's move forward. And every time he tried,
a Senator from the other side of the aisle, the side of the aisle that
was begging for amendments, stood up and objected. They objected to
calling up the very same amendments they argued were the obstacle to
bringing this bill to finality.
Let me say this: It is very difficult and rare to revive and
resuscitate a bill that doesn't get cloture once we have moved beyond
it. I hope this is an exception. To paraphrase what Senator Martinez
and Senator Salazar said, there are so many people counting on us when
it comes to this vote, thousands and thousands of young people who are
begging for this DREAM Act, praying it will pass and give them a
chance, millions of people living in shadows, in fear, working hard
every day, loving their families, going to the church of their choice,
trying to be part of their community, and realizing they are just one
knock on the door away from deportation and the destruction of their
family and their life as they know it. I cannot imagine living with
that shadow over one's life, and so many do. We owe it to them to do
something that is honorable in response to this need. And we owe it to
our country to repair our broken borders, to slow this flow of illegal
immigration, to make sure there is enforcement in the workplace, and to
make sure America's doors are still open for those who bring their
dreams to America and make it the great Nation we love so much.
Madam President, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.
Mr. SESSIONS. Madam President, I want to say a few words. I heard
colleagues who have spoken. I have listened at length to some very
eloquent remarks evoking sincere feelings and emotions. I certainly
respect that. We all in this body are great advocates. We disagree
sometimes.
I suggest that we had a couple of problems with the bill, and that is
why the bill failed. There are a lot of problems with the legislation
itself, and there are a lot of problems that the American people had
with it.
The bottom line is, the American people did not have confidence that
we were moving legislation that would effectively accomplish what all
these great remarks we heard earlier promised it would do. I don't
think there is any other person in this body who has personally
prosecuted an immigration case. But this Senator has. I did that years
ago. I am familiar with the process. I am familiar with the system and
the difficulties, including how overwhelmed it has been and why it is
not working. The American people were expecting us to fix it.
In my opinion, after studying the bill at great length, analyzing it
in detail, I don't believe it would have worked any better than the
bill in 1986. So I made up my mind last year and I made up my mind this
year that I was not going to support legislation that is not going to
work. I was not going to support the 1986 bill. I was not going to vote
for a bill that promises amnesty today and law enforcement in the
future, and the amnesty occurs but the law enforcement does not. That
is the fundamental thing.

Today, somebody handed me some polling data that sheds a little light
on this weeks events. The article, posted on the Rasmussen Reports
website is titled ``Support for an immigration bill falls.'' A poll
conducted Monday and Tuesday night found that 23 percent of voters now
support the bill, while 50 percent are opposed. Two-to-one opposed to
the bill.
We have heard people say we need to do something, even if it is the
wrong something or even if it will not work. We have heard the claim
that the American people just want us to do something over and over
again. That sounds good, I will admit. We certainly do have serious
problems with our immigration system.
The Rasmussen Report says, however, that ``in the face of public
opposition, some supporters of the legislation have argued that the
compromise may not be perfect, but doing something is better than
nothing. Voters have a different view--a solid plurality believes it
would be better for the country to pass no bill at this time rather
than letting the Senate compromise become law.'' And that is why
people's phones have been ringing off the hook, because we are given a
responsibility to deal with an important issue.
I love my colleagues. I tease them a lot. I call the group of them
that wrote this bill the masters of the universe. They all met in some
secret room somewhere, and they started plotting, working, and trying
to do the right thing. They met and met and worked and worked, and they
decided that they were going to tell America what we needed. They were
going to figure it all out, and just explain to us what the real facts
were and how this thing ought to be handled.
But, they are a bunch of politicians--good people but still they are
politicians. They didn't invite anybody from the Border Patrol into
their meetings to give them advice as to what is actually working on
the borders. They didn't invite interior agents from Immigration and
Customs Enforcement to tell them how to fix the interior immigration
problems. They did have, of course, direct and regular contact with big
business. They had direct and regular contact with special advocacy
groups, who had their list of demands. They were actively seeking out
ways to gain the political support of this group and that group because
that is what they think legislation is sometimes. But they forgot about
the American people.
I just want to say that on this bill, the American people watched
this process closely. On this bill, the American people kept up with
it. On this bill, the American people were expecting this Congress to
pass legislation that would significantly and dramatically improve the
colossally broken system we have.
They didn't expect them to pass a bill that would double illegal
immigration. They didn't expect them to be offering to pass a bill that
would, according to the Congressional Budget Office just a few days
ago, only reduce illegal immigration by 25 percent. After all of the
things they were asking us to accept in this bill, we were only going
to get a 25-percent reduction in illegal immigration? The American
people didn't expect that the deal makers would offer a bill up that
would say that after President Bush put the National Guard on the
border, somebody who came across the border and ran past the National
Guard and got into our country before January 1 of this year would be
given amnesty and put on a path to citizenship in this country. That is
not principled.
How can we ever assert the rule of law in America if we make a
statement to the world that the border is closed, we call out the
National Guard, and then anybody who runs by there and gets in, we say:
OK, home free, home free, now you are on a path to citizenship. That is
not good.
Last year, the bill said that anybody who got in after January 7,
2004, was not eligible for amnesty. This year, they moved the
qualifying date to January 1, 2007. Why? I guess it was a political
deal. I guess they didn't ask the American people what they thought was
moral and just and fair and responsible and compassionate. The deal
makers decided that on a political basis it made sense, I suppose. I am
told that this is what it was--give here and give there and before you
know it you have a bill.
I suggested last year that we have a legitimate guest worker program,
and I was so happy to hear that promises were made this year that we
would

[[Page S7322]]

have one that could actually work. I was excited about that. But as I
began to examine it I didn't believe it would be a practical solution
the way it was written.
I emphasized last year that people in a temporary worker program
should not come for 3 years, as last year's bill did, with their
family, and be able to extend again and again and then be expected to
leave the country sometime in the future. So this bill was better in
that regard, but it still allowed families to come with the person--20
percent--and others to come and visit, creating all kinds of
possibilities for overstays in that regard. That is why the
Congressional Budget Office projected a very large increase in visa
overstays as a result of the way this bill was written in that regard.
I was very intrigued and excited that my suggestion last year--that
we model our legislation on the Canadian system--was being considered.
The administration said they liked this merit-based system. They liked
the point system. They thought we ought to go more in that direction.
Canada admits 60 percent of its people through immigration under a
competitive, skill-based system because the Canadians have learned and
have proven, if you talk to them, as I have, that persons who come in
with any college, with a skill, and with a good work history--and if
they speak English or French, they give extra points for that--very
seldom go on welfare, very seldom take benefits from the government,
and become properly productive citizens who pay taxes and become good
citizens for Canada.

We have, at this time, only a mere 13 percent of our people coming in
on the basis of their skills. Today, the overwhelming majority come in
based on chain migration and family connections. I thought we were
going to make a real move toward the Canadian system with this bill. I
know Senator Kyl worked his heart out to try to do that, but when the
final compromise was reached, he couldn't get a better deal than this,
that this merit system would really not take effect for 8 years, and
during the interim period, there would be a surge of chain migration
numbers for 8 years, perhaps triple the current rate. To me, that was a
political compromise too great. That is something I couldn't support.
Let me just speak briefly about how we came to the final vote
tonight. I think the majority leader, Harry Reid, maybe wanted to get
rid of this bill from the start. He has now begun to say it is
President Bush's bill, but it was the Senate's bill. He called it up
without a committee hearing. It is Senator Reid's bill, if you want to
know the truth. He brought it up under rule XIV. It didn't even go to
committee. The majority leader has that power. He called it up directly
to the floor.
Yes, it had bipartisan support, but he was the one who enabled that
to occur. The new bill was introduced after they called up the old
bill. Then Reid tried to substitute a completely new bill, and then we
debated that with not a great deal of time. For example, I had 20, 30
amendments filed. I got one amendment up for a vote. I tried to bring
up a number of other amendments, and every time I have tried to bring
one up, it was objected to. Senator Cornyn, one of the finest, most
capable lawyers in the Senate, a former attorney general of Texas and
justice on the Texas Supreme Court, got one amendment up for a vote.
Senator Elizabeth Dole, from North Carolina, had an amendment dealing
with drunk drivers--an important amendment. She tried to bring hers up,
and it was objected to. This afternoon, there was only one amendment
pending that actually had been called up and had been introduced,
filed, and made pending.
So we had this discussion about having some votes this afternoon, and
then we were told that we were going to re-vote on cloture tonight.
What I want to say to my colleagues and anybody who is listening is
that if cloture had been obtained tonight, after a half dozen more
votes, no other amendments would have been pending.
So we simply had a little disagreement this afternoon. We said that
we wanted to have other amendments pending so that if cloture were
invoked, we would have amendments that could be voted on post cloture.
In fact, we were working to pare down over 200 amendments that had been
filed, to bring in those amendments to under 20 amendments, maybe even
lower. That is when the majority leader decided to call another cloture
vote, and that is the vote that failed, I would note, on a bipartisan
basis. While 7 Republicans voted for cloture, 12 Democrats voted
against the majority leader and against cloture.
We had not had sufficient time to debate this bill. We had not had
sufficient time to have amendments. It will be almost a thousand pages
when put in bill language. That is not a bill that can be passed in a
couple of weeks. It needs more debate than that, and it was never taken
to committee. The committee did not hear it, and no amendments were
offered there. It was brought directly to the floor.
So I would just say that I think we do have a responsibility to treat
people who come to our country, even those who come illegally,
compassionately, fairly, justly, and according to good principles. We
have a responsibility to create a legal system that works in America. I
am afraid this bill didn't do it. That is my problem with the bill. I
think that the American people agreed. If we come back again, the bill
needs to be a vastly improved product. I would be glad to suggest some
ways to make it better. In fact, I have before, and I will again.
Madam President, I thank the Chair, and I yield the floor.

____________________