Congressional Record, Volume 153 Issue 106 (Thursday, June 28, 2007)

[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 106 (Thursday, June 28, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8641-S8651]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM ACT

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the
Senate will resume consideration of S. 1639, which the clerk will
report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

A bill (S. 1639) to provide for comprehensive immigration
reform and for other purposes.

Pending:

Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified amendment No. 1934, of
a perfecting nature.
Division VII of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified
amendment No. 1934.
Division VIII of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified
amendment No. 1934.
Division IX of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified
amendment No. 1934.
Division X of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified amendment
No. 1934.
Division XI of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified
amendment No. 1934.
Division XII of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified
amendment No. 1934.
Division XIII of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified
amendment No. 1934.
Division XIV of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified
amendment No. 1934.
Division XV of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified
amendment No. 1934.
Division XVI of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified
amendment No. 1934.
Division XVII of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified
amendment No. 1934.
Division XVIII of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified
amendment No. 1934.
Division XIX of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified
amendment No. 1934.
Division XX of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified
amendment No. 1934.
Division XXI of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified
amendment No. 1934.
Division XXII of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified
amendment No. 1934.
Division XXIII of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified
amendment No. 1934.
Division XXIV of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified
amendment No. 1934.
Division XXV of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified
amendment No. 1934.
Division XXVI of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified
amendment No. 1934.
Division XXVII of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified
amendment No. 1934.
Kennedy Amendment No. 1978 (to Division VII of Reid (for
Kennedy/Specter) modified amendment No. 1934), to change the
enactment date.

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Massachusetts is
recognized.

[[Page S8642]]

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I understand that at the hour of 10:30 we
will be having the cloture vote on the immigration legislation. Am I
correct?
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The vote may actually be at 10:50.
Mr. KENNEDY. Fine. I yield myself 5 minutes.
Mr. President, this has been a long journey to try and bring our
broken immigration system and our broken borders to the place where
this Senate can take action. Today's action is going to be absolutely
key to whether we will be able to continue and finalize this
legislation at the end of the week. So today's vote is a critical vote,
key vote, perhaps the most important vote we have had here on this
issue over the period of the last 3 years.
Our Judiciary Committee has been working on this legislation. Senator
Specter has been a key part of this whole effort. It has been a
bipartisan effort. Our quest has been a bipartisan effort here on the
floor of the Senate.
Those of us who are committed to this issue believe we have an
important responsibility to try to achieve something. We believe the
reason for us being here, whether it is from Massachusetts or
Pennsylvania or from other States, is to deal with the public's
business, the Nation's business. This is the Nation's business. I think
outside of the issue of the war in Iraq, this is front and center for
our country.
People in my State are concerned and affected by it, and they are in
other parts of the country as well. We have 900,000 nonnative-born
individuals in my State of Massachusetts. Of those 900,000, 200,000 are
undocumented. We have more than 3,000--in the city of Boston--more than
3,000 small businesses directly responsible for 34,000 jobs, more than
half a billion dollars in pay and sales taxes in my State by those who
are born in other countries. They represent probably less than 10
percent of the State's population, and 17 percent of the job market.
The workers in our State, 17 percent are nonnative born, a
demonstration that those individuals who have come here to the United
States want to work. They want to work. They also are men and women of
faith. They are men and women who care about their families, by the
fact that more than $48 billion is returned every single year to the
countries in Central and South America.
They care about their families. They want to work. More likely than
not, they are all men and women of deep faith and religious belief.
That is reflected in many of our communities in my State and in travels
around the country. You see that day in and day out.
Also they want to be a part of the American dream. We have seen that
reflected in the total numbers of individuals who have served in the
Armed Forces of our country. Some 70,000 have served in Iraq and
Afghanistan, and many have lost their lives. But in a number of
instances, individuals, the undocumented, have crossed the line in
terms of immigration, drawn here by the great economic magnet, the
economic magnet that is on this side of the border that says: Look, we
need you over here to make the American economy work. We want to pay
you over here when you are unemployed over here. We will provide you
the resources so you can look after your family. People have been
attracted to that magnet. We have them here.
For those toward the end of this discussion and debate, as we have
heard on the floor, we know what they are against. We do not know what
they are for. Time and time again they tell us: We do not like this
provision; we do not like that provision; we do not want that part of
it. They ought to be able to explain to the American people what they
are for. What are they going to do with the 12\1/2\ million who are
undocumented here? Send them back? Send them back to countries around
the world, more than $250 billion; buses that would go from Los Angeles
to New York and back again? Try and find them? Develop a type of
Gestapo here to seek out these people who are in the shadows? That is
their alternative? That is their alternative?
This country and this Senate is better. We have a process that said:
Look, okay, you are here and undocumented. You are going to have to pay
a price. We are going to take people who are in the line who have said
they want to play by the rules. They go and they wait, and you wait and
you wait and you wait. You pay and pay, and you pay and you pay. You
pay your fees, you pay your processing fees, your adjustment fees. You
pay not only for yourself but the other members of the family. You
demonstrate you are going to learn English, you demonstrate you worked
here, that you are a good citizen, that you have not had any run-in
with crime, and then maybe you get on that pathway with a green card,
and, perhaps, in 15, 18 years you will be able to raise your hand and
be a citizen here in the United States. This is the issue. Are we going
to have a constructive and positive resolution of this issue, or are we
going to be naysayers, bumper sticker sloganeers who say: We are
against amnesty, or, we are against this bill?
America deserves better. The issue is too important. Now is the time,
this is the place. The Senate is the forum where we have to take this
action.
I am hopeful that America is watching this and will understand what
is at stake here. This is an issue and this is a vote of enormous
importance. We talk of votes here. Some are more important than others.
A few are of enormous significance and consequence. A few of them are
going to have a defining impact about what kind of society we are going
to be in, how we are going to treat each other, whether we have a
respect for our fellow human beings and our fellow individuals who are
here in this country, and whether we believe that our greatest days are
yet to come.
Are we going to respond to the voices of fear? And that is the issue.
Are we going to have a positive resolution, a constructive resolution,
that is going to continue to be shaped as it goes to the House of
Representatives, shaped there as well by different responsible figures?
It may have somewhat of a different view. Or are we going to say no,
no, we have listened to those voices of fear who say: Absolutely not.
We are going to take the status quo. Every person who votes ``no'' is
going to know that this situation is going to get worse and worse and
worse.
We are going to say that: Oh, yes, sure, we will do something down on
the border. But you are never going to have the kind of workforce
enforcement, you are never going to have the kind of absolutely
essential identification system that any responsible immigration system
is absolutely required to have.

This is a vital vote about the future of our country or the past.
That is going to be the issue in question when the time comes to vote.
Mr. President, I reserve the remainder of my time.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I yield myself 5 minutes.
The legislation now pending is the very best that can be done by very
extensive work on the immigration problems in the United States.
Last year in the 109th Congress, the Judiciary Committee, which I
chaired, produced a bill. This year we went to a little different
procedure and we have structured a bill which is the best that can be
done as of this moment. It may yet be improved in the balance of the
amendments yet to be voted upon, if cloture is invoked on this vote
this morning, a 60-vote tally, obviously very difficult to get to.
Had I written the bill, it would have been substantially different. I
would have agreed with Senator Menendez that there ought to be more
consideration to families. I would have agreed with Senator Dodd that
we ought to have more parents coming into this country. I would have
agreed with those who oppose the touchback, which I think is punitive
and formalistic and not related to anything, necessarily.
But this is an accommodation. The art of politics is to compromise
and to accommodate. We have constantly said to the opponents: If you
have something better, tell us what it is.
Not only have the opponents not told us what they have in mind for
something better, but they have refused to come forward and offer any
amendments and have used Senate procedure to stop others from offering
amendments. So for hours I sat here as manager of the bill doing
nothing. That is why we have utilized the unusual procedure we have
today. Some are complaining that they have not had an opportunity to
offer amendments but,

[[Page S8643]]

candidly, it is their own fault. When they had a chance to do so, they
didn't. Beyond that, they stopped others from offering amendments.
We have the advocates for the immigrants. They have a very strong
case. What this bill started out to do was to deal with the 12 million
people who are so-called ``living in the shadows'' in fear. This bill
does deal with that issue.
Those who say it doesn't go far enough have a point, but I think they
lose sight of the core reason the bill is structured, as it is for the
12 million. It accommodates them in a realistic way and puts them on
the path to citizenship. That has led many to cry ``amnesty.'' I don't
think it is amnesty for the reasons that have been enumerated many
times. But amnesty, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. These
12 million are going to be here whether we legislate or not. So if it
is amnesty, to do nothing is to have silent amnesty. They are going to
stay here. To do nothing is to perpetuate anarchy.
Those who have argued strenuously and cogently to have border
protection and employer verification to eliminate the magnet and to
reimpose the rule of law are right. But they are not going to get the
core of what they want if no bill is passed. So we ought to come to
grips with the basic reality that the fundamentals on both sides have
been realized, not the periphery and not the fringes, but the
fundamentals.
We have had some votes which really defy the tradition of the Senate.
We had the Dorgan amendment early on where many voted against their
preferences, their policy judgments, to kill the bill. They had a
position as to what they thought was right. They had expressed it. We
knew what their policy position was. They voted the other way to kill
the bill.
Yesterday, on the Baucus amendment, it was really extraordinary. I
have been here a while. Twenty-three Senators changed their votes. You
can tell on the cards, there is a check one way and a cross-off and a
check the other way. Twenty-three Senators changed their votes. We talk
about profiles in courage, this is a profile in cynicism. Votes were
changed in order to defeat the bill, not because they expressed the
preferences of the Senators. There were colleagues who said how they
would vote, and then they didn't vote the way they said they were going
to. I am not going to call them commitments which were breached, but
that term might be used. It is a little strong to say that a Senator
broke his word and breached a commitment. Let me simply say that some
said how they would vote and then didn't. That is an unusual occurrence
in the Senate.
It has been a common practice for Senators to vote in favor of
cloture and then to vote against the bill. That expresses a middle
ground that the Senator doesn't think there ought to have to be a
supermajority that is, 60 votes--to carry the bill. But the Senator
doesn't want to vote for the bill and so expresses himself or herself
by voting for cloture so the bill can go forward but then votes against
the bill on the merits. Those who vote against cloture will be
responsible for killing the bill. They can then vote against the bill
so that they won't be responsible for passing the bill. Around here, we
like to avoid being responsible for one thing or another, but if we do
not have cloture on this bill, the bill is dead. If we have cloture,
then Senators are not responsible for its passage when they vote
against it.
I urge my colleagues to bear that in mind. We pride ourselves in the
Senate on being courageous. President Kennedy's book as a Senator was
titled ``Profiles in Courage.'' We have one illustration of that in the
senior Senator from Arizona, Mr. McCain, who is on the front page of
the Washington Post today with the reports about his courageous stand
on immigration costing him votes, perhaps costing him the Republican
nomination. No one knows for sure, but it isn't helping him any.
It would be my hope that the Senate would rise to the occasion and
would not kill this bill because if it is done, it is finished for the
year. Next year is a Presidential/congressional election. We are off to
2009 and beyond. Then it will only be worse.
I leave my colleagues with the essential point that a responsible
position would be to let the bill go forward. There is another 60-vote
margin coming on the issue of a budget point of order. Don't be
responsible for killing the bill by voting against cloture. Then you
don't have to be responsible for the bill when voting no, and let the
majority rule but not call for a supermajority on this very critical
issue.
I reserve the remainder of my time.
Mr. KENNEDY. I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from California.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Casey). The Senator from California.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, this is really a very difficult time
because probably in the 14 years I have been here, there is no more
important bill than this one. There is no more difficult bill. There is
no bill that calls upon the courage of every single Senator more than
this bill. I know what has been happening out there. I know the calls
that have been made. I know some of the threats that have been made.
Yet we have a chance in this bill to do the right thing.
Many people don't understand the bill. They don't understand the
large amount of the bill that is dedicated to enforcing our borders.
They don't understand the money that the fees and fines put into the
process to be able to do what we need to do with respect to
immigration. They don't understand the reforms that are made in
employment verification. They also don't understand the threat to our
national security--that having so many people in this country and not
knowing who they are, having more people coming into this country every
day and not knowing who they are--the threat this presents to the
security of every man, woman, and child.
This bill is aimed to fix what is broken in our system. I have had
individual Senators say to me: Well, if the bill was just this part, I
would vote for it; if the bill was just that part, I would vote for it.
The point is, this part or that part won't get 60 votes. Only a
combination of parts to accomplish a broad fix of broken borders,
broken identification, a totally broken system will get enough votes.
We are very close to the votes required. I don't know what to say to
Members who are not yet decided to bring them on board. I agree with
what Senator Kennedy and Senator Specter have said: If we miss this
opportunity, there is not likely to be another one in the next few
years to fix the system. What will that mean? That will mean every year
700,000 to 800,000 more people will come across our borders unobserved,
unknown. They will disappear into the shadows. If there is period of
``do nothing'' for the next 10 years, that will be 7 to 8 million more
people illegally in the country. If we don't fix our visa overstay
system, which is in this bill--40 percent of the illegal population are
visas overstay; many of them don't go home--that will remain unfixed.
If we don't come up with fraud-proof identification cards, employers
will never really be able to know whom they employ and whether that
individual is a legal person. This is an opportunity to fix all of
that.
The fixes may not be to everyone's liking, but they are positive. It
is the most positive immigration bill we have considered yet.
Additionally, never before in the history of the country is more
being done to fix our broken borders, to fix interior enforcement, to
fix employer sanctions. One thing is happening that has turned this
bill by talk show hosts into something it is not, and that is for those
people who are opposed, this is an amnesty bill. I don't know how we
could say more strongly that it is not. I don't know how we could say
more strongly that what is out there now is a silent amnesty. People
are here 15, 20, 25 years. They are working, owning property. They now
have a state of amnesty. This bill reconciles that. This bill changes
that. This bill prevents it from happening in the future. It is hard
for me to understand why that doesn't measure big-time with many of our
colleagues. Apparently, it does not.
I can only come to the floor to plead: Let us finish this bill. If
you are concerned about enforcement, Senator Graham's amendment coming
down the pike next has many very interesting improvements. Give him a
chance to offer that amendment, then vote no. But I think to cut this
bill off now is a huge mistake. We are so close. There are still a
series of amendments to be passed. Please, give them an opportunity
postcloture. Please vote for cloture.

[[Page S8644]]

I yield the floor.
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished
Senator from Arizona.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, in my last election my constituents sent me a
couple of clear messages, one of which was do something about illegal
immigration. In my State, we have a majority of people who are entering
the country illegally coming across the border from Mexico, creating
huge environmental problems, law enforcement problems, people
victimized on both sides, costs to the State, lawlessness literally on
street corners. The people of my State are saying: What is happening to
our country when we can't enforce the laws at the border? Are we not a
sovereign country? They have a point.
We understand politically that in order for us to enforce the law, we
have to have an enforceable law. As a result, this bill we have put
together for the first time creates a strong bipartisan consensus for
all of the things that are needed to control our border. But it does
more in two key ways. The reason these other two things are important
is because a lot of my constituents have said: Why should we believe
that a new law is going to be enforced when the existing law isn't
enforced? That is a very good question. Presidents, both this
administration and the previous administration, and Congresses have not
done an adequate job of enforcing the law. But it is also true that we
have two laws that are not very enforceable. We know that 40 percent of
the people who are here illegally have overstayed visas. They didn't
cross the border illegally. It is very hard to enforce the visa
overstay laws because they are not adequate. We don't have adequate
resources, either.
Secondly, the employee verification system in place today is a joke.
Everyone knows that. One can use counterfeit driver's licenses and
Social Security cards, and we all know there are millions of people
working here illegally though they presented documents to an employer.
The 1986 bill wrote a very bad provision for employment verification.
It doesn't work.
So for those who say, ``Well, let's enforce the law, and then there
will be the attrition of illegal immigrants and we will get back to a
good situation,'' the answer is, of course, if you do not have a good
law to enforce, you cannot work that strategy. The law has to be
changed. It is very clear that in order to change the law so it can be
enforceable--both with respect to visa overstayers and at places of
employment--we are going to have to have a group of people get
together, Democrats and Republicans, willing to support some things
that each other wants in order to pass such a law. That is the genesis
of the bill that is before us.
I hope my colleagues will recognize that doing nothing is not
acceptable. It is pretty clear, when we come down to this cloture vote,
that is going to be very close, that 40 Senators might be able to stop
the Senate dead in its tracks here, thwarting the will of the majority.
Those 40 Senators would be people on one side who want it all their way
and on the other side who want it all their way, thwarting the will of
the majority, which recognizes that neither side can have it all their
way but that doing nothing is not acceptable. That will be the result
if cloture is not invoked.
The final point I would like to make is there are several amendments
we should be voting on to improve this legislation. Only by moving
forward with the cloture vote will we be able to vote on those
amendments. One of those is an important amendment, a very large
amendment, which was put together by Senator Graham and myself and
Senator Martinez and several others which really tries to fill in all
of the gaps in enforcement, some of which have been pointed out to us
by our constituents, by critics of the bill, by folks on the talk
shows, by people who oppose the bill. We have taken a lot of those
suggestions--many of them are great ideas--and put them into this
enforcement amendment. It will, for example, make it very difficult for
a visa overstayer to be able to be here illegally in the future. We are
going to know when they overstay their visa. We are going to detain
them until they can be removed from the country. That is just one
example. So in order to be able to vote on those strong and
strengthening amendments, we have to invoke cloture, we have to be able
to proceed.
There are still two more opportunities for those who want to express
their opposition to the bill to do so. There will be a budget point of
order, and there will be the vote on final passage. But surely our
colleagues would, I hope, respect the will of the majority, which is to
keep moving to make this bill as good as we possibly can, and then
everybody has the ability to vote however they want to at the end of
the day. I hope my colleagues will agree that doing nothing is not an
option and that we can continue to move the bill forward by supporting
cloture.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, we have 5 allotted minutes for Senator
Sessions, and I see he is on the floor.
I ask the Senator, would you like to take that time now, Senator
Sessions?
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I understood it was 10 minutes.
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I say to the Senator, you have 5 minutes
from each side. You have 5 from me and 5 from Senator Kennedy.
I say to the Senator, I was going to yield you 5 minutes now.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I would be pleased to use 5 minutes now.
I believe some of the other Members I wanted to share time with are
available and can speak.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I will be pleased to yield 2 minutes to
the Senator from North Carolina, Mrs. Dole.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Carolina.
Mrs. DOLE. Mr. President, first of all, I thank Senator Sessions,
Senator DeMint, and Senator Vitter for their hard work on this matter,
and other Senators as well.
Certainly, there is one area in which we have much agreement; that
is, securing our borders. Clearly, the American people do not have any
confidence at all in the promises this will be done when there is track
record of total failure. In 1986, there were 3 million illegal aliens,
and today, of course, there are 12 million or more. The Government does
not seem to know how many.
I have an op-ed piece from the Charlotte Observer. Just quoting from
1986: This bill will help us provide the immediate relief on the border
that we need. In my view, it is a good bill. We should all support it,
be glad that this long controversy has finally been put to rest.
Well, Chuck Grassley made it very clear in strong points that he was
wrong in the 1986 vote, that this did not provide the security at the
border we have been promised again today.
In 2006, we had the Secure Fence Act, 700 miles of fencing to be
built. Only 2 miles have been built.
So my view, my strong view, is it is not just promises, it is proof
people want. The American people want to see results, control of our
borders. We need to establish standards or metrics and then show they
have been achieved--for example, having a significant decrease in the
number of illegal aliens who cross our border, having a significant
decrease in those who overstay their visas, a high rate of deporting
those where courts have said a person needs to be removed from this
country and deal with contentious provisions at a later date. But these
are the key issues people are concerned about.
The first order of business must be that we ensure that the mess we
are faced with now never, ever occurs again. We should be laser-focused
on our resources, our energy, and ensuring our borders are secure.
My staff and I have been meeting with sheriffs across our State.
Section 287(g), which is law now, provides that these local officials
can be deputized to enhance the ICE agents. This is very important.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
Mrs. DOLE. I thank the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I thank Senator Dole and yield 2 minutes
to the Senator from Tennessee, Mr. Corker.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.

[[Page S8645]]

Mr. CORKER. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Alabama for
yielding me time.
I just wish to say I appreciate the efforts of all involved in what
has happened over the last month. I really do. I have voted three times
against cloture and will vote for a fourth time today against cloture.
But at the same time, I really have tried to play a constructive role
in voting on each amendment based on the merits of that amendment.
This bill is about a lot of things. Certainly, people have put a lot
of effort into it--based on compassion, based on trying to solve a
problem. It also, no doubt, has some more sinister components. I hate
to say it: cheap labor, party politics, who is going to gain the
majority. So there are a lot of different things at play here. I think
we all understand that. But I really do appreciate the efforts of all
involved.
Today, this is going to get down to four or five Senators. I
encourage them to vote against cloture, for this reason: I think this
bill is not good for America because I believe America has lost faith
in our Government's ability to do the things it says it will do. We
have had intelligence gaffs. We have had evolving reasons as to why we
are involved in military conflicts. We have seen what has happened at
the local, State, and Federal level on things such as Katrina. We have
ministers who want to go on mission trips today but who cannot get
passports renewed. This is about competence. It is about credibility. I
think Americans feel they are losing their country. They are not losing
it to people who speak differently or talk differently or are from
different backgrounds; they are losing it to a government that has
seemed to not have the competence or the ability to carry out what it
says it will do.
I believe this bill is going to fail. What I would urge people to do
is not what they have said today--and that is, to let it pass--but to
move, meaning to pass into another time, but approaching it on a more
modest basis, where we do the things we say we will do and build a
foundation that will cause the American people to actually have faith
in this Government.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Obama). The Senator's time has expired.
Mr. CORKER. I thank the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Tennessee and
would recognize the Senator from South Carolina, thanking him for his
leadership. As the Senator from Pennsylvania, Mr. Specter, said, this
has been a tough battle. I thank Senator DeMint for his courage. I
yield him 1 minute, I believe.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina.
Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, I thank the Senator for his leadership.
Mr. President, this immigration bill has become a war between the
American people and their Government. The issue now transcends anything
related to immigration. It is a crisis of confidence between what the
American people believe our Government is and should be, what it is to
them now, and what they perceive it to be.
This vote today is really not about immigration. It is about whether
we are going to listen to the American people and realize we need to
proceed more carefully, in a more sensitive manner, and appear to be
listening to the concerns of the American people.
The allocation of time, as we approach this vote, is very symbolic of
where we stand. The supporters of this bill, out of an hour's time,
have allocated 10 minutes to the opinion of the American people. I
think we should listen to the American people. I hope all of my
colleagues will decide not to move ahead with this bill and vote
against cloture today.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
Mr. DeMINT. I thank the Chair.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I reserve my 5 minutes remaining.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina.
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I ask Senator Specter, may I be
recognized?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
Who yields time?
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished
Senator from South Carolina.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina.
Mr. GRAHAM. I thank the Chair.
To my colleagues who have participated in this debate, I think it has
been a once-in-a-lifetime experience, I hope for all of us, because if
we did this every week, the Senate would fall apart because this is
tough politics, there is no question about it.
I do not pretend to know that I am on the wrong side or the right
side of the American people. I can tell you what polls say--that once
you tell people what is in this bill, about border enforcement,
employer verification, merit-based immigration, the temporary worker
program, it is 2 to 1 in about every poll I have seen. I guess you can
get the poll to respond to the way you ask the question.
What I am trying to do is provide a solution to a problem that
affects the American people. Here is the formula for this problem to be
solved: bipartisanship.
To my friends on this side, if you think you can ignore Democrats,
good luck. They exist. There are a bunch of them over there. Yes, raise
your hand if you are a Democrat. Why don't you all leave? Well, they
are not going away. Now, there are a bunch of us over here. Good luck
ignoring us.
I would like to secure the border. How many Democrats would?
Everybody raises their hand, right? Wouldn't you like to have an
employer verification system where an employer would know the
difference between somebody who is illegal and legal?
Enforce the current law. To my friends who call me endlessly and say,
``Just enforce the current law, Lindsey,'' well, here is Lindsey's
response: I have looked at it. It is unenforceable. You can get a job
in America based on a driver's license and a Social Security card being
presented. What did all the hijackers on 9/11 have in common? They all
had fake ID cards. They all had fake driver's licenses. I can get you a
Social Security card. To my good friend from South Carolina, Jim
DeMint, we can go to the Jockey Lot in Anderson, and I can get both of
us a Social Security card by midnight with whatever name you want,
whatever number you want.
Until we address that problem, we are never going to solve illegal
immigration because it is about jobs. Current law is a failure. The
public should be cynical. Are we helping them when we fail? We are at
20 percent approval, and we deserve it. We do not deserve our pay
raise. But who are the 20 percent? What do you like about this
Congress? I cannot believe there are 20 percent of the American people
who like what we are doing up here because we are doing nothing but
talking about what we will not do, and we are playing a game that the
American people do not understand, like the other side does not exist.
You are never going to deal with this issue until you embrace the 12
million. No Democrat is going to let you build a fence and do all the
things we want to do without addressing the 12 million. That is never
going to happen.
I want to address the 12 million. The reason I want to address the 12
million, it bothers me there are 12 million people here that we do not
know who they are and what they are up to. I wish they would go away,
but they are not. It is a problem America has to deal with, and we want
someone else to do it because we are afraid if we do a plea bargain it
is amnesty. We are afraid that the people who don't want to deal with
the 12 million will come and take our jobs away. This is about our
jobs.

Well, this is bigger than my job. The 12 million will be dealt with.
They are not going to be ignored. They will be dealt with firmly and
fairly eventually. They are not going to be deported. They are not
going to jail. They can't be wished away. So we need to come together
in a bipartisan manner and have principled compromise where we deal
with the 12 million, we deal with broken borders, we get a temporary
worker program.
To my Republican friends, remember this day if you vote no. You will
never, ever have this deal again. There will never be a merit-based
immigration system such as we have negotiated because President Bush
has helped us. To my friends on this side who say President Bush would
sign anything, you don't understand what is going on here. President
Bush has given us as Republicans things we will never get without

[[Page S8646]]

him being President. We have lost the majority, but we have a good deal
because we have hung together. A temporary worker program and a merit-
based immigration system is a good deal for this country. If we say no
today, good luck of ever getting it again.
The 12 million stay here on our terms. They have to learn English.
They have to pay fines. They can't be citizens unless they go back and
start over. This is as good as it is going to get.
Now, if we lived in a perfect world where the Republicans could write
this bill, it would be different, and I can assure you, my Democratic
friends would have written a different bill. All I can tell you is, the
American people have a low opinion of us because we can't seem to do
the things we need to do----
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
Mr. GRAHAM. Because we are too worried about us and not them.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts is recognized.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I understand we have 11\1/2\ minutes; is
that correct?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.
Mr. KENNEDY. I yield 4 minutes to the Senator from Colorado and the
remaining time between the Senator from Illinois and myself.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Colorado is recognized.
Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I come to the floor this morning to urge
my colleagues to vote yes on cloture as we bring this debate to a very
pivotal point.
As I come to the floor this morning, I am reminded of the millions of
phone calls and letters that everybody has received in this Chamber.
Many of those phone calls and those letters, those demonstrations have
been filled with hate and with venom. They have been filled with hate
and with venom.
We are the United States of America because we are able to bring our
Government together to function on behalf of the people of this
country. So for all of those who have sent arrows in the direction of
the profiles in courage who have been working on this issue for the
last 2 years, I say to them: Remember the prayer of Cesar Chaves of the
United Farm Workers in which he said: Help us love even those who hate
us. Help us love even those who hate us so that we can change the
world--so that we can change the world.
Much of the venom we have seen around this issue has to do with the
fact that people are afraid. People are afraid. I ask my colleagues to
join us in looking forward and not being afraid because what makes
people afraid today is that we have a system of chaos, a system of
broken borders, a system of victimization.
So how do we move forward to create a system of law and order of
which we in the United States of America can be proud? How do we do
that? Well, we have done our best. We have put forward a proposal that
says the porous borders we have in America are not good for America.
The national security of the United States of America demands--
demands--that we move forward and secure those borders. So we have done
it in this legislation, and we have included the funding to be able to
secure those borders.
Second of all, for more than the last 20, 25 years, what has happened
is that the United States of America has looked the other way as our
immigration laws have been broken time after time. So for the first
time, what we have done with this legislation is we have said we are
going to enforce the laws. We are going to have tough employer
sanctions against employers who hire those who are unauthorized to work
in our country. We are even going to criminalize their conduct. So we
will enforce the laws of our Nation.
Thirdly, we take the 12 million undocumented workers who are here in
America, and we say: You are going to pay a fine. You are going to be
punished. You are going to learn English. You are going to have to go
to the back of the line, and then after some time on the average of 11,
12 years, between 8 and 13 years, if you do all the things we require
of you, including paying these very high fines and paying all of the
processing fees required, then at that point in time, you will have an
opportunity to become a citizen if you so choose.
To me, that is a commonsense solution to the national security issue
which is at stake in this debate. It also is a commonsense solution for
a nation that prides itself in enforcing our laws. We are not like
other countries around the world that don't enforce our laws, but we
will be.
So I say this to my colleagues on the other side: I respect you. I
respect you for what you do here and for how you bring a civil debate
to the issues that we deal with every day. But at the end of the day,
if we don't get this done today with this cloture vote, it is going to
mean the national security of the United States of America will
continue to be compromised into the future for who knows how long. It
will mean we will continue to be a nation that does not enforce our
laws on immigration within this country, and it will mean we will have
failed to develop a realistic and honest solution to the 12 million
undocumented workers who labor in America every day.
So I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this cloture motion that
we have coming up.
I yield the floor.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I believe there is 5 minutes on this
side.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama is recognized.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I know good people have worked on this
bill, and they are promoting it as a good step forward on immigration.
But our own Congressional Budget Office has answered that question.
They have said if this bill becomes law, we will see only a 13-percent
reduction in illegal immigration into America, and in the next 20 years
we will have another 8.7 million illegals in our country. How can that
be reformed? I submit this would be a disaster.
The American people, I do not believe, desire to double illegal
immigration. That is what this bill--legal immigration. That is what
this bill does.
Mr. President, I ask that I be notified after I have spoken for 2
minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator will be notified.
Mr. SESSIONS. The bill is promoted as providing security, but the
Border Patrol Association, the former Border Patrol Officers
Association, two former chairmen, chiefs of Border Patrol of the United
States, former Assistant Attorney General in charge of immigration and
security say it will not work, and they are scathing in their criticism
and steadfastly reject this bill. I believe it will further diminish,
therefore, the rule of law.
The procedure used to get us to this point is unprecedented in the
history of the Senate. It allows the leadership to approve every single
amendment that gets voted on and gives us only 10 minutes in opposition
this morning, while the masters of the universe get over 40 minutes, 50
minutes to promote their side. It is typical of the way this debate has
gone, and it will breed more cynicism by the public.
I have just seen a notice this morning from the Sergeant at Arms to
tell us that the telephone systems here have shut down because of the
mass phone calls Congress is receiving. A decent respect for the views
of the American people says let's stop here now. Let's go back to the
drawing board and come up with a bill that will work.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has used 2 minutes. He has 3
minutes remaining.
Mr. SESSIONS. I thank the Chair. I yield 2 minutes to the Senator
from Louisiana who has been effective and courageous in his advocacy on
this issue.
Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, if the Chair could inform me when I have
used 2 minutes.
Mr. President, we all stand here on the floor of the Senate and
regularly acknowledge and even praise the common sense and the wisdom
of the American people. Well, this vote this morning for each of us is
about whether you really believe that or whether it is just a cheap
political line to use.
The American people get it, and they do have common sense and wisdom
on this issue. They know repeating the fundamental mistakes of the 1986
bill, joining a big amnesty with inadequate enforcement, will cause the
problem to grow and not diminish. They know promising enforcement after
30 years of broken promises isn't good enough. They know the so-called
trigger is a

[[Page S8647]]

joke because if the trigger is never pulled, the Z visas, the amnesty
happens forever. They know groups like the Congressional Budget Office
have estimated that this bill, so big on enforcement, will only
decrease illegal immigration 13 percent and will have another 8.7
million illegal aliens coming into the country. They know that. They do
have wisdom and common sense.
The question is: Do we or do we decide that Washington knows best?
This isn't just a vote about immigration. This is a vote about whether
this body is out of touch, whether this body is arrogant, or whether it
will respect the true wisdom and common sense of the American people.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama has 1 minute
remaining.
Mr. SESSIONS. I yield to the Senator from South Carolina, Mr. DeMint.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina is recognized.
Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, one of the most encouraging parts about
this debate--there is a silver lining--is it has reengaged the American
people and shown us that we are truly a government of the people. They
have spoken and they have spoken loudly. Our phones have been ringing
off the hooks. We have received e-mails and letters. People are trying
to get in touch with us. Even now, they are calling in such numbers
that it has crashed the telephone system in the Senate.
My question to the Senate today is: What part of ``no'' don't we
understand? We need to vote no against cloture and stop this process
that is alienating the American people from what we do, and then
enforce the laws that are on the books and prove we are a nation of
laws and that we will enforce the laws that have been passed by this
Congress.
I thank the Chair, and I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 10 seconds remaining.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I wish we had been given more than 10
minutes, while the other side has been given 40 or 50. I thank the
Chair and yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
Mr. KENNEDY. I understand we have 7\1/2\ minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.
Mr. KENNEDY. I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the Senator from Illinois.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois is recognized.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, in our Nation's history, this Nation of
immigrants, we have always struggled with this issue. As soon as people
arrive on this shore, there is a question about how many more can we
take? What does it mean for our Nation if more people come from strange
lands who don't speak our language? Yet this diversity has made America
what it is today. We have sustained this great Nation because we are
different and because we are accepting and because the people who
struggle to come to these shores--my mother and her family, the
families of all of us--brought with them a special quality: a
determination for a better life and a willingness to take a risk to
come to America. They brought a willingness to take the hardest,
toughest jobs to prove the American dream and hope that their children
will have better. Multiply that by millions and you have the story of
this great Nation.
Throughout our history, we have always debated how many more we can
take. That debate comes to a head this morning in just a few minutes.
We will have a chance on the Senate floor to decide whether we step
forward.
I have heard the voices against this saying: Not this bill. We can
surely do better. We have worked hard on this bill. We have made
compromises. There are parts of it which I detest and parts which I
embrace, and that is the nature of compromise and cooperation. I thank
all of those who have crafted it and put it together.
But I want to tell my colleagues what is at stake is very basic and
fundamental as to who we are as a nation. Outside this Chamber, outside
this congressional debate, you have heard the voices. Some of them are
dark and ugly. They are not the voices of America, a hopeful nation
that understands we can be a nation of laws, and with diversity we can
grow in this world in the 21st century. No, these are voices of
exclusion, people who want to keep those people out, people who want
those people to go away. That is not America. That isn't what we are
about as a nation. That isn't what distinguished us in the world. What
distinguished us is we can stand up--Black, White, and brown, from all
across this world--and make a nation. We have done it for over 200
years. We can do it again. Those who argue this diversity will destroy
us don't understand the core values of this country.
I beg my colleagues this morning, even if you disagree with this
bill, don't end this debate. Give us a chance to continue this debate
and bring this to a conclusion and a vote. Give us this procedural vote
that is coming up so we can continue this debate. If at the end of the
day we step back and say we are surrendering to these negative voices
across America, the Senate can't rise to the occasion with an important
bill, it won't speak well of the Senate. There are those of us
entrusted with the responsibility to serve in this place.
Let us say to people across America that we are going to have strong
borders, we are going to enforce the law in the workplace, we are going
to have rules that say to those who are here illegally you can only
stay if you meet the strictest requirements. I think that is a
reasonable standard, a reasonable compromise in the greatest tradition
of America.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts is recognized.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask to be notified when I have 30
seconds remaining.
We are called today by the ancients, the Founders of this Republic.
Are we going to form a more perfect union? It was in this Chamber a
number of years ago that we knocked down the great walls of
discrimination on the basis of race, that we knocked down the walls of
discrimination on the basis of religion. We knocked them down regarding
national origin, we knocked them down with regard to gender, we knocked
them down with regard to disability. Here in this Senate we were part
of the march for progress.
Today, we are called on again in that exact same way. This issue is
of the historical and momentous importance that those judgments and
those decisions were. When the Senate was called upon, it brought out
its best instincts, values, and its best traditions. We saw this Nation
move forward. Who among us would retreat on any of those commitments?
Who among us would say no to that great march for progress that we had
in this Nation?
The question is: Is it alive? Is it continuing? Is it ongoing? Those
who vote ``aye'' say it is ongoing, that we are continuing that march
toward progress.
Year after year, we have had broken borders. Year after year, we have
the exploitation of workers. Year after year, we see people who live in
fear within our own borders of the United States of America. This is
the opportunity to change it. Now is the time. Now is the time to
secure our borders. Now is the time to deal with the national security
issue. Now is the time to resume our commitment to family values, to
people who want to work hard, men and women of faith, people who care
about this country and want to be part of the American dream, who have
seen their sons and daughters, in many instances, fight and lose their
lives in Iraq and Afghanistan. That is the challenge.
Now is the time. This is the place. This bill is strong. It is fair
and practical. Today, my friends, we have the choice: Are we going to
vote for our hopes, or are we going to vote for our fears? Are we going
to vote for our future, or are we going to vote for our past?
This is the place. Now is the time. This is the vote. Vote ``aye''
for America's future.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania is recognized.
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, let me first compliment the distinguished
Senator from Massachusetts.
I yield 2 minutes to the Senator from Florida.
Mr. MARTINEZ. Mr. President, I have been involved deeply in this
debate that we have had over a couple of

[[Page S8648]]

years. It comes to a close in the next day or so in the Senate. We have
an opportunity to move forward, to move the debate on, and to have an
opportunity for the House of Representatives to then add their measure
of influence upon what this bill should be about. We should not simply
say the bill isn't good enough so we are going to do nothing.
For those who find criticism with the bill, it is much easier to tear
down than it is to build. We have crafted a bill over months of
discussions and negotiations, which does a tremendous amount to end the
illegality, secure the border, to ensure that we have the mechanisms to
enforce an employment verification system so we don't have any more
illegal workers. We do a measure of justice to those who have been here
and worked and made this country their home for, in many instances, two
decades.
The fact is, for those who simply say do nothing, they have a measure
of responsibility to what comes next. What comes next is a continuation
of the illegal system. To say simply ``enforce the law,'' well, the
current laws aren't good enough to be enforced. They do not have the
enforcement mechanisms necessary to ensure that we do have workplace
enforcement, which at the end of the day is the most important measure
we can have.
A lot has been said about the cost to our society of illegal
immigrants being legalized. The CBO, which we trust on these issues,
has said--this is the nonpartisan congressional budget office--they
find that the new Federal revenue from taxes, penalties, and fees under
this bipartisan immigration bill will more than offset the cost of
setting up the new immigration system and the cost of any Federal
benefit temporary workers, Z visa holders, and future legal immigrants
under the bill would receive.
I thank the Senator for yielding me some time. I simply say that it
has been a pleasure to work with those who have committed themselves to
do something about the problem, and not simply say what is imperfect
about the solution but to find a solution to this difficult problem.
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, the Senator from Florida has such a
background, being an immigrant himself, and I think our cause would be
well served if he took another 3 minutes.
Mr. MARTINEZ. I thank the Senator.
Let me touch on that issue. As an immigrant to America, I understand
what it means to live the American dream. I had the opportunity to come
to this country as a 15-year-old child, not speaking the language or
understanding this culture; yet the embrace that America gives those of
us who are fortunate enough to come to these shores and make America
our home made me an American.
Many out there today fear that immigrants don't want to assimilate.
The fact is--and I have said this before--immigrants come to America
not to change this country but to be changed by this country. That was
my experience. I think it is the experience that has been repeated to
the over 200-year history of this Nation as immigrants have come to
these shores, and America has had the magic that it performs on those
of us who come here to become Americans to then make a contribution, as
I hope I am making today by serving in the Senate.

The fact is, this is a divisive issue, but I believe it will bind and
heal our country if we deal with it. Unfortunately, to do nothing will
continue this festering debate in our country that is so divisive and,
at times, so ugly. Our country is better than that. I think our country
has the resourcefulness and the strength of culture to ensure that we
not fear they want to change America, but that we change them to be the
Americans that we hope all of us are and can be.
I thank the Senator for the additional time. This is something in
which I have invested my heart and soul because I believe it to be so
right for our country. This isn't about the 12 million immigrants. This
is about what that will do to ensure that America continues to be the
place it has been for more than 200 years, as a beacon of liberty, the
``shining city on a hill'' that President Ronald Reagan spoke of. We
have to continue that tradition and welcome more people into that
tradition by allowing them to be legal citizens, legalize their status,
while we make it clear that the game is up, and from now on immigration
into America will only be legal and not illegal, as it has been for
more than two decades.
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I compliment the Senator from Florida for
his statements. Had we more time, all of us could tell our own stories.
Mine involves two immigrant parents. My father came here at 18, in
1911, and contributed to this country. My mother came with her family
at the age of 6, in 1906, and contributed to this country. I thank the
Senator from Florida, Senator Martinez, who has a special story to tell
because he himself is an immigrant and is a great testament to what we
are trying to accomplish with this bill.
I yield 3 minutes to the Senator from Arizona, who has made such a
unique contribution to this bill, coming from a border State and facing
irate calls, not that they are necessarily representative of all of
Arizona. He said he learned some new words.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania doesn't have 3
minutes. He has 30 seconds. The Senator from Massachusetts has 1\1/2\
minutes remaining.
Mr. KENNEDY. I yield that time to the Senator.
Mr. SPECTER. I have 10 minutes 30 seconds because I have been
allotted the leader time. I yield him 3 minutes.
Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I can say this in about 90 seconds. The
Senator from Pennsylvania made the point. It is a sad commentary in
America today that many Americans have lost faith in their Government.
The only group that has poll numbers less than the President these days
is the Congress. Americans don't believe their Government is
representing them and acting on their behalf. The polls show it.
On one of the most critical issues of our day, we will not restore
that confidence if we fail to act again. The only way we can restore
that confidence is by acting. Skepticism is not a reason for inaction.
For those who say, well, let's enforce our laws, I remind them that
some of our laws are unenforceable. My conservative friends are the
first to point out that the 1986 law is not an effective law. It is
unenforceable. Until we change it, we are not going to be able to
enforce the law. That is why it is time for us to return to the rule of
law in America. By returning to the rule of law, we can restore that
confidence that is so critical for the American people to have in their
Government.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania is recognized.
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, how much time remains?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 9 minutes.
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, we have heard from the objectors what the
American people think. I am not sure they have standing to represent
the American people. We heard the junior Senator from South Carolina
speak as to his interpretation of what the American people think. But
we heard the senior Senator from South Carolina stand in firm support
of this legislation--the Senator representing South Carolina, as well
as the other Senator from South Carolina.
We know as a matter of practice that the callers and the e-mailers
are characteristically naysayers. You hear a lot more from people who
object than you do from people who are in favor. We know that the
majority of America is the silent majority. From my own soundings, what
I hear on the train when I come back and forth from Pennsylvania, what
I hear in the restaurants, on the streets, and in the fitness club is
to proceed, try to find a way to improve a very serious situation in
immigration.
No one of us is able to speak for the American people. We hear
different voices at different times. I know one thing with relative
certainty, and that is you cannot tell what the American people think
simply by those who object and those who call. We do not run America in
a representative democracy, in a republic, by public opinion polls. If
we did, we would take the public opinion poll and we could dispense
with all of the fat salaries that Members of Congress get. We could
dispense with paying 535 people and take a public opinion poll and sign
it into law.
I think the most erudite statement on this particular issue was
uttered by

[[Page S8649]]

a distinguished British philosopher politician, named Edmund Burke, in
a speech to the electorate of Bristol on November 3, 1774, when he made
this famous statement:

Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but
his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he
sacrifices it to your opinion.

Now, that is not to say in a representative democracy we ought to not
consider the opinions of our constituents, but I think Edmund Burke was
right more than 200 years ago when he talked about our duty in owing
our constituents our best judgment.
What is our best judgment and how have we come to it? We have been
working on immigration a long time, and we saw the failures of the 1986
legislation. Because the 1986 legislation failed doesn't mean we cannot
correct the problem. Things are very different today than they were in
1986. For one thing, we now have a foolproof method of determining
whether an individual is legal or illegal. So now we can hold employers
responsible not to hire illegal immigrants. We can take away the magnet
of work in this country for those who are not here legally.
We have lost sight I think, of the very fundamental purpose as to
what we are trying to accomplish through legislation to reform
immigration.
We are trying to secure our borders. This bill goes a long way to
securing the borders with fencing, with automobile blocks, with more
Border Patrol. The entire 2,000-mile plus of the border will be more
secure. It can't be perfectly secured, and that is why we have employer
verification which, as I say, is now foolproof. Then when we deal with
the immigrants, we are trying to deal with the 12 million undocumented
immigrants. Those who would like more--I said earlier that if I had my
choice, I would agree with Senator Menendez, that I would have more
family unification. I would agree with Senator Dodd that I would have
more visas for parents. But this legislation is crafted by compromise,
and that is the art of politics--the compromise. So it is the best bill
that we can structure and come forward with.
If we do not legislate now, we will not legislate later this year
when our calendar is crowded with Iraq and appropriations bills and
patent reform, et cetera. We are then into 2008 and an election year
for President and Congress, and it will be pushed over to 2009.
Circumstances will not be better then, they will be worse.
We have a very frequent practice, as we all know, for Senators to
vote in favor of cloture, and then to vote against the bill. That is an
expression of policy judgment not to hold a piece of legislation to a
60-vote supermajority level. We do not have an issue of freedom of
religion. We do not have an issue of freedom of speech. We have a
public policy question where in good conscience Senators can say: I am
opposed to the legislation, but I do not think it ought to be held to a
60-vote supermajority.
If we do not invoke cloture, this bill is dead. A vote against
cloture is a vote to kill the bill. A Senator may vote for cloture and
then express himself in opposition to the bill by voting against the
bill.
For those who did not hear an earlier statement I made, I repeat, we
had the unusual situation on the Dorgan amendment where Senators did
not vote their judgment on public policy but voted against their own
judgment to kill the legislation.
We have a tally sheet, those of us who work in the Senate, showing
how Senators voted. And on the Baucus amendment yesterday, we had the
extraordinary situation of 23 vote changes. You can tell the vote
change because there is a mark on one side, it is crossed off, and the
mark then appears on the other side.
I suggest to my colleagues that we had more cynical maneuvering on
the Baucus vote, which is characteristic of the maneuvering throughout
the text of this legislation, and that what this body ought to do is
take the famous words of President John F. Kennedy when he served in
this body, to exercise a little courage, a profile in courage as
opposed to what appears to be a profile in cynicism.
The essence of it is, Senators can vote for cloture not to kill the
bill, and then vote against the bill and exercise their right to do
that and still allow this bill to go forward where it may yet be
improved.
Mr. President, I see my time is just about to expire. How much time
remains?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is 20 seconds remaining.
Mr. SPECTER. I yield back the remainder of my time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader is recognized.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, is immigration a problem? Of course, it is.
But is immigration a problem that is limited to Texas, Arizona,
California, the border States? No. Is immigration a problem only for
big cities, such as San Antonio, New York, Chicago, L.A.? No.
Immigration is a problem all over America.
As people know, I am from Searchlight, NV, a little town I was born
in and the town where I lived. It is 60 miles southeast of Las Vegas in
the southern tip of the State. Is immigration something people talk
about in Searchlight? Of course, it is.
Take yesterday. I got back to my office, and there was a call from
Tommy. I am not going to give his last name for fear somebody will look
him up. Tommy called me--and I do have his last name--and he said: I
have a friend here who is from Mexico, has been here quite a long time.
What is this immigration bill you are working on going to do for him?
Should I be in favor of it?
Yes, Tommy, you should be because your friend will no longer have to
be afraid of being arrested and deported. This bill will allow him to
come out of the shadows.
The same day, yesterday, I received my mail from Searchlight.
Somebody sends me my mail that comes addressed to me in Searchlight. A
letter was addressed to me and said, among other things: You probably
should go under the witness protection program because of your work on
this immigration issue.

That is from Searchlight, NV. This doesn't take into consideration
the letters and the calls my offices in Reno, Las Vegas, and here in
Washington get filled with hate. I have, of course, turned the letter
that I got from Searchlight over to the Capitol Police.
This situation is a problem not just in the border States and big
cities, it is a problem all over America.
We are said to be the greatest deliberative body in the world.
Shouldn't we do something positive regarding an issue that affects
everybody in America, immigration? Some say it is the country's biggest
problem. While that may be debatable, it is a significant problem, one
of the top two or three problems facing us, and the problem is not
going to go away. Is it right to wait until there is a new President?
Should we wait until we get a new Congress? Of course not. Talk radio
has had a field day, these generators of simplicity.
I want everyone to know, and I want the record spread, I do not
believe anyone who is a Senator who votes against this motion to
proceed is filled with prejudice, with hatred, with venom, as we get in
our phone calls and our mail. I don't believe that. But I do believe we
have an issue before us that we must resolve.
My family has been enriched by immigration. My father-in-law, Earl
Gould, came to America from Russia when he was a little boy. When he
came here his name was Israel Goldfarb. He assumed the name Earl Gould.
When I met my wife, her name was Landra Gould.
I had the opportunity to talk with my father-in-law many times. Every
one of his siblings who came to America had a different name. They all
changed their name in this great melting pot.
My father-in-law died as a young man--he was 52 years old--from
leukemia. I think of him often. My wife is an only child. I think of
him often for the kindness that he showed me. This ring I wear he gave
to me on his death bed. This watch that I wear he gave to me. When he
was sick and knew he was going to die, he and my mother-in-law took a
trip to the Middle East and brought me back this watch. They didn't
have money to buy watches for me, but they bought a watch for me. I
still wear the watch.
In this great melting pot we have called America, of which I am a
part, my five children are eligible for Israeli citizenship because,
with the Jewish

[[Page S8650]]

tradition, lineage is with the mother, not the father. My children
proudly know this.
My family has been enriched as a result of immigration. I knew my
grandmother. I talked with her lots of times. As a boy, I listened to
her stories. I talked with her. I can still hear her voice--oh, we had
a grand time. That is how she talked. She was born in Katherine's
Cross, England, and came over here as a girl, married my grandfather,
had eight children, all of them raised in Searchlight, NV.
Those are two examples of what immigration is all about, two examples
of what it has done to Harry Reid.
My skin is real white. We have African Americans. The Presiding
Officer is of African-American ancestry. In the back of the room--we
don't even have to look at the back of the room--we have Hispanics. But
my skin is American skin, just as the Presiding Officer, just as
Senator Salazar.
What is immigration all about? A number of years ago, one of
America's great journalists, James Fallows, wrote a book called ``More
Like Us.'' The thesis in this book was that everyone was saying we
should be more like Japan.
Japan was at the zenith of its height and power, and we were in the
doldrums economically. Everyone said we should be more like Japan.
James Fallows wrote this book, ``More Like Us,'' and he said: No, we
should be more like us, like America, and the No. 1 issue he talked
about being different from Japan, our strength, is immigration. I
testify that is true; that is the strength of this great country.
Today in America we have a problem with immigration. We have porous
borders that need to be fixed. We are Senators, I repeat, Members of
the greatest deliberative body in the history of the world. With the
honor of our office comes enormous responsibility. We must resist the
ever-present temptation to do what is expedient at the expense of what
is right. When short-term gain diverges from long-term good, we must
choose the good. This is our challenge today.
I ask every one of my colleagues, Democrats and Republicans, not to
shrink from this issue, to support us moving forward on this
legislation for the good of our country, the greatness of our country.
There are 100 of us. If each one of us were given a few days to draft
an immigration bill. We probably could do a better job than what has
been done with this bill, in our own minds. But some of the greatest
legislative minds in this body have worked long and hard to come up
with this bill. Perfect? No. Good? Yes.
I hope we can do the right thing and move this legislation forward. I
am not here to tell my colleagues this legislation is the greatest
thing that ever came along, but it is something that is badly needed,
and we need to continue this process.
Mr. President, there is $4.4 billion for border security. Is it going
to help? Oh, it will help a lot. There are 370 miles of fencing, which
we authorized and, of course, have done nothing about; 300 miles of
vehicle barriers; 20,000 new Border Patrol agents; more than 100
ground-based radar and camera towers; and 31,500 detention beds.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, under the UC, I think we are well passed
the time the leader had, and this side only received 10 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The leader has the floor. The majority leader
has the floor.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I would say this, 31,500 detention beds. One
of the problems we have----
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, point of order. The unanimous consent
gave the leader 12 minutes. It is now about 12 or 15. Does that
override the leader's time?
Mr. REID. It is my understanding in the order----
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair always allows some latitude to the
two leaders. He is currently 1 minute over time.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, it is my understanding of the order of the
presenters that Senator McConnell and I had 10 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is true.
Mr. REID. Ten minutes was given to the distinguished Republican
manager of the bill, and I now am using my leader's time that was not
in the order.
I would also say to my friend from Alabama that I would never rudely
interrupt him whenever he is giving a speech. I would never do that,
and I wish he hadn't done that, but I will continue.
Mr. President, 31,500 new detention beds. In Las Vegas, when someone
is picked up on an immigration violation, there is no place to put
them. That is what this legislation does, actual money--not authorizing
money but actual money. That is important.
It creates a mandatory employer verification system, which is so
important, and a pathway to legalization for 12 million people, like my
friend Tommy from Searchlight, NV. What do they do? They work, they pay
taxes, they learn English, they stay out of trouble, and they pay fines
and penalties. That is important.
AgJOBS. The DREAM Act. This legislation is important. It has come
about as a result of a lot of hard work. For example, we have had 36
hearings, 6 days of committee action, 59 committee amendments, 21 days
of Senate debate, and 92 Senate floor amendments.
I know the vote for everyone here today is a difficult vote. For some
of us, it may be the most difficult of our careers. There is no perfect
answer to this problem of immigration, but there are two paths. One
path is diversion and negativity, while the other embraces hope. One
path embraces exclusion, the other embraces the American dream. One
path embraces the status quo, the other pragmatism. Democrats and
Republicans alike, let us keep hope alive, let us keep the American
dream alive, let us keep pragmatism alive and well here in the Senate.
I ask you to join on the path of hope, a courageous path, a path that
President Bush, Leader McConnell, and I have chosen, a bipartisan path
to legislative hope. That is what this vote of cloture is all about.
Voting for cloture on this imperfect bill will make our union a little
more perfect.

Cloture Motion

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order and pursuant to rule
XXII, the Chair lays before the Senate the pending cloture motion,
which the clerk will state.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

Cloture Motion

We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the
provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate,
do hereby move to bring to a close debate on Calendar No.
208, S. 1639, Immigration.

Ted Kennedy, Russell D. Feingold, Daniel K. Inouye, Tom
Carper, Sheldon Whitehouse, Pat Leahy, Richard J.
Durbin, Benjamin L. Cardin, Ken Salazar, Frank L.
Lautenberg, Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, John
Kerry, Charles Schumer, Ben Nelson, B.A. Mikulski,
Harry Reid.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum
call has been waived.
The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on S.
1639, the bill to provide for comprehensive immigration reform, and for
other purposes, shall be brought to a close?
The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.
The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from South Dakota (Mr.
Johnson) is necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Brown). Are there any other Senators in
the Chamber desiring to vote?
The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 46, nays 53, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 235 Leg.]

YEAS--46

Akaka
Bennett
Biden
Boxer
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Clinton
Conrad
Craig
Dodd
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Graham
Gregg
Hagel
Inouye
Kennedy
Kerry
Klobuchar
Kohl
Kyl
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Lott
Lugar
Martinez
McCain
Menendez
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Obama
Reed
Reid
Salazar
Schumer
Snowe
Specter
Whitehouse
Wyden

NAYS--53

Alexander
Allard
Barrasso
Baucus
Bayh
Bingaman
Bond
Brown
Brownback

[[Page S8651]]

Bunning
Burr
Byrd
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Corker
Cornyn
Crapo
DeMint
Dole
Domenici
Dorgan
Ensign
Enzi
Grassley
Harkin
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Isakson
Landrieu
McCaskill
McConnell
Murkowski
Nelson (NE)
Pryor
Roberts
Rockefeller
Sanders
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Stabenow
Stevens
Sununu
Tester
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner
Webb

NOT VOTING--1

Johnson

The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote the yeas are 46, the nays are 53.
Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn not having voted in
the affirmative, the motion is rejected.
The majority leader is recognized.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, the vote has been cast. As I told a number
of my Republican friends, even though the vote is disheartening to me
in many ways, I think as a result of this legislative work we have done
in the last several months on this legislation, there have been
friendships developed that were not there before, trust initiated that
did not exist before. I say to my friends, Democrats and Republicans,
this is a legislative issue. It will come back; it is only a question
of when. We are only 6 months into this Congress. We have so much to
do.
Hopefully, this lesson we have all learned will be one where we
recognize we have to work more closely together. I hope we can do that.
I say to all of you, thank you very much for your patience--the phone
calls I have made; if I twisted arms, it was not very often. I so
appreciate--I think I speak for all of us--being able to be part of
this great Senate where we are able to participate in decisions such as
this.

____________________