[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 22 (Tuesday, February 10, 2015)]
[Senate]
[Pages S879-S882]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY FUNDING
Mr. HEINRICH. Mr. President, funding for the Department of Homeland
Security runs out in 17 days. Rather than working with Democrats to
pass a clean Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill, many
Republicans are prioritizing politics over our national security.
With threats emerging every day both at home and abroad, casting
doubt on future funding for the Department of Homeland Security is a
terrible idea. Shutting down DHS has real consequences, especially in
border States such as New Mexico. A DHS shutdown would threaten public
safety, hinder interstate commerce, hurt our economy, and jeopardize
critical funding for State, local, and tribal government activities.
Some of my Republican colleagues are willing to let these
consequences happen because they have an immigration policy
disagreement with the
[[Page S880]]
President. That is no way to govern, and it is not real leadership.
As a border State, New Mexico plays a critical role in protecting our
homeland. DHS Customs and Border Protection agents and officers at New
Mexico's two ports of entry at Columbus and Santa Teresa are
responsible for maintaining our security and for screening vehicles and
would-be crossers. These public servants put in long hours in order to
keep all of us safe. They apprehend drug smugglers, human traffickers,
and gang members. They also play a direct role in facilitating critical
trade and interstate commerce between the United States and Mexico.
That impacts our economy in New Mexico, particularly in Hidalgo, Luna,
and Dona Ana Counties.
New Mexico is a growing international trade center and the Columbus
and Santa Teresa ports of entry are key to growing the diversity of my
State's economy.
Recently, a House Republican said that if we run out of DHS funding,
``it's not the end of the world.'' I disagree, and so do many of my
constituents.
Let me be clear about what a DHS shutdown would mean for New Mexico.
It would impact our Southeast Federal Law Enforcement Training Center
in Artesia. This facility trains our Customs and Border Protection
agents and officers. It would also compromise sheriff and city police
departments across the State who use DHS funding to increase personnel
and purchase equipment. Moreover, DHS helps fund some of our most
important security programs such as the New Mexico All Source
Intelligence Center, a public safety partnership based out of Santa Fe
that is designed to collect, analyze, and disseminate intelligence.
A shutdown would also risk important DHS grant funding for New Mexico
at the Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management. This
agency works closely with DHS to aid communities after natural
disasters. In times of crisis, DHS works hand-in-glove with the State
of New Mexico.
For example, last year severe thunderstorms and floods caused
disruption of oil and gas development, agricultural losses, and
extensive damage to critical infrastructure across New Mexico, hitting
counties such as Colfax, Eddy, Lea, Lincoln, Otero, San Miguel, Santa
Fe, and Sierra.
FEMA, an agency under DHS, worked collaboratively to help these
communities rebuild and recover. In fact, since 2002, New Mexico has
received more than $238 million in DHS grant funds. These resources
provide statewide hazard mitigation assistance and help repair damaged
roads, bridges, and low-water crossings after these disasters.
As current cabinet secretary-designate for the New Mexico Department
of Homeland Security and Emergency Management Mitchell Jay puts it, a
DHS shutdown would:
. . . have a very negative effect. We'll lose our grant
funding for local and State emergency managers. We fund a
portion of their salaries through DHS grants, and we can't,
nor can the counties and municipalities, afford to absorb
those costs at this time. . . . We can't afford to lose our
emergency managers, they're key representatives in our
communities who help develop mitigation plans for all types
of emergencies. They're our first line of defense should any
emergencies occur at the local level.
These examples are just a glimpse at the security, economic, and
emergency risks of allowing DHS funding to expire.
Former Department of Homeland Security Secretaries Tom Ridge, Michael
Chertoff, and Janet Napolitano joined in a bipartisan call for Congress
to act swiftly and remove uncertainty from an agency in charge of
keeping us safe.
A Department of Homeland Security shutdown would also either furlough
DHS employees or require many of them to work without a paycheck. That
means men and women who work tirelessly to keep our Nation safe would
have to live with the uncertainty of whether they are able to support
their families.
DHS workers don't deserve that. They shouldn't be collateral damage
in an ongoing ideological battle here in Washington, DC. I would like
to believe a debate such as this would be about the merits of DHS
funding and the DHS funding bill, but unfortunately that is not the
case. This debate is about Republicans picking a political fight with
the President over an immigration system we all recognize is broken. As
a way to vent their frustrations, Republicans are unfairly targeting
undocumented students known as DREAMers. At times such as this, one is
forced to wonder if some on the far right fear DREAMers more than ISIL.
But we are not a country that kicks out our best and brightest
students. We are not a nation that separates families.
I have met many DREAMers over the past 10 years in New Mexico. They
are smart, they are hardworking, and most of them don't know how to be
anything but an American. They grew up here, and they want to give
back. I have heard their stories. I have read their letters.
For example, there is a bright young New Mexican named Yuri. Her
family emigrated from Mexico to the United States when she was 2 years
old. As a student at Highland High School in my neighborhood in
Albuquerque, Yuri volunteered in our community. She served as student
body president. She graduated in the top 10 percent of her class, and
she received the 2013 Sandia National Laboratories scholarship.
In 2013, she was approved for Deferred Action for Childhood
Arrivals--known as DACA--and is currently studying chemical engineering
at the University of New Mexico. She wants to use her degree to enter
the medical field.
Less than 2 years ago, after much debate and compromise, the Senate
passed a bipartisan immigration reform bill. That bill would have
modernized our immigration system to meet the needs of our economy. It
would have provided an accountable pathway to earn citizenship for the
undocumented workers currently living in the shadows in our country. It
would have dramatically strengthened security at our borders.
Accountable immigration reform received 68 votes in this body and
demonstrated the kind of legislation and the kind of leadership that is
possible when we work together. The American people are frustrated with
the gridlock here in Washington, DC. Frankly, I don't blame them. We
need pragmatic solutions to fix our immigration system, but withholding
DHS funding and jeopardizing our national security is not a solution.
In fact, I would say it is emblematic of what is broken. Instead of
focusing on deporting some of our country's brightest students, I would
urge my Republican colleagues in the House and in the Senate to direct
their attention to the real threats our country faces--the gang
members, the drug traffickers, the cyber hackers, and the terrorists.
Let's work together to make sure the Department of Homeland Security is
adequately funded.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I rise to urge the Senate to take up a
clean Homeland Security appropriations bill and pass it without further
delay. I know we have had several votes on the floor on proceeding to
the bill, but I would urge the leadership to make it clear that we
stand on record for a clean Homeland Security appropriations bill.
We have an obligation to protect the American people. Given the
terrorist threat we face both at home and abroad, it is irresponsible
to continue to fund the Department of Homeland Security with short-term
budgets and bring them to the edge of an agency shutdown. We also
should not force hard-working Federal workers to stand in the crossfire
between Congress and the President.
Providing the resources our Federal, State, and local law enforcement
officers need to carry out their vital around-the-clock mission should
not be caught up in partisan political disagreements. We need a clean
appropriations bill for the Department of Homeland Security.
We face a dangerous world today in light of recent terrorist attacks
throughout Europe, Asia, and North America, and the ongoing threat of
ISIS. I know I express the views of all Members of the Senate in
expressing our deep condolences and prayers for
[[Page S881]]
the Kayla Mueller family as we learn today of her fate at the hands of
ISIS. ISIS is actively recruiting foreign fighters, who are being
radicalized and then returned to their home countries, including
countries in Europe and North America.
We need to fully fund without further delay, uncertainty, or another
short-term budget the critical homeland security, law enforcement, and
intelligence activities and programs of the Department of Homeland
Security.
Mr. President, we are now 4 months into the fiscal year. One-third of
the fiscal year is already over for the Department of Homeland
Security. We should not keep funding DHS on short-term budgets. No
agency or private business, for that matter, can effectively implement
a budget and carry out its mission under this type of financial
tightrope. How would you like to run a business not knowing whether
your budget is going to be there starting March 1? How do you plan? How
do you make commitments for the year to carry out your mission when you
don't know whether you are going to have the budget support starting
March 1 or whether it is going to be continued on a continuing
resolution, whether you are going to have to go through a government
shutdown or whether you are going to have a budget? You can't run an
agency that way.
DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson has stated that if Congress continues to
fund his agency on short-term budgets, it will harm its mission and
programs at the agency. We created the Department of Homeland Security
in response to the devastating attacks on our country on September 11.
For example, short-term funding may limit more aggressive
counterterrorism efforts, weaken our cyber security protections against
hackers trying to corrupt or steal our data, delay enhancements to
aviation security, slow down new border security initiatives, and defer
new grants to State and local law enforcement. DHS may have to delay or
postpone contract awards and new acquisitions, which also hurts small
businesses and our economy. DHS will have to scale back employee
training and postpone the hiring of new personnel.
We have broad bipartisan support on almost all aspects of this $40
billion Homeland Security funding measure. This legislation funds
critical agencies, including the Coast Guard; the Transportation
Security Administration, TSA; the Federal Emergency Management Agency,
FEMA; the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office; and the Secret Service,
just to mention a few of the agencies that come under the Department of
Homeland Security.
Three former heads of the Department of Homeland Security, both under
Democratic and Republican administrations, recently wrote a letter to
Congress urging us to passes a clean Homeland Security appropriations
bill and avoid another short-term funding measure or, worse yet, a
government shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security at the end
of February.
Let me quote from a part of the letter from former Homeland Security
Secretaries Ridge, Chertoff, and Napolitano, again representing both
Democratic and Republican administrations:
[W]e write to you today to respectfully request that you
consider decoupling critical legislation to fund DHS in FY
'15 from a legislative response to President Obama's
executive action on immigration...The President has said very
publicly that he will ``oppose any legislative effort to
undermine the executive actions that he'' has taken on
immigration. Therefore, by tethering a bill to fund DHS in FY
2015 to a legislative response to the President's executive
action on immigration, the likelihood of a DHS shutdown
increases.
The letter continues:
We do not question your desire to have a larger debate
about the nation's immigration laws. However, we cannot
emphasize enough that DHS's responsibilities are much broader
than its responsibility to oversee the Federal immigration
agencies and to protect our borders. And funding for the
entire agency should not be put in jeopardy by the debate
about immigration...It is imperative that we ensure that DHS
is ready, willing and able to protect the American people. To
that end, we urge you not to risk funding for the operations
that protect every American and to pass a clean DHS funding
bill.
That is from a letter from three former Secretaries of the Department
of Homeland Security who worked for both Democratic and Republican
administrations.
Mr. President, what if Congress allows DHS funding to lapse on
February 27? That is the end of the current funding resolution. We
would then ask critical frontline personnel, such as Border Patrol
agents and air marshals, to work without pay. That is insulting to
those law enforcement officers who are putting their lives on the line
to keep Americans safe every day. That is insulting to the families of
those law enforcement officers who depend on a steady paycheck to make
ends meet. And that is insulting to the American people, who deserve
nothing less than world-class service from government officials.
I must tell you that we have gone through government shutdowns
before. It hurts people, no question about it. But guess who gets hurt
the most. The taxpayers of this country. It ends up costing us more. We
don't save taxpayer dollars. It ends up costing more, jeopardizing the
mission, and putting individual families at risk.
Let me cite one example that many of our States and localities know
very well. It is the Emergency Management Grant Program. Many local
fire, police, and emergency management officials rely on funding from
the Homeland Security Grant Program, which provides funds to States,
territories, and other local governments to prevent, protect against,
and respond to potential terrorist attacks and other hazards. This is a
program local governments rely upon. They do not know whether they are
going to get any of these funds after March 1. How do they plan? Local
officials as well rely on funding from FEMA's emergency management
performance grants. These grants help them to prepare for the
unexpected, whether it is a natural disaster or some type of terrorist
activity. It allows them to be prepared. We require this training, and
it is 50 percent Federal funds and 50 percent local funds. How do they
make arrangements to set up this training if they do not know whether
the Federal funds are going to be there?
I can speak for the State of Maryland. We have a very tough budget.
Our Governor is trying to figure out how he is going to make ends meet.
He doesn't have the resources to advance the Federal share. That is no
way for us to work in federalism with our local governments when we
have a partnership to keep everyone safe.
I can mention many other programs that are in jeopardy of not being
funded if we don't pass a clean bill, but let me just in conclusion
address the issue of immigration.
Due to many extraneous amendments that were added by the House to the
Homeland Security appropriations bill, we have this challenge here in
the Senate. The President has made it clear he will veto any bill that
expressly limits his authority to exercise prosecutorial discretion on
immigration matters.
While we agree that our current immigration system needs
comprehensive reform, including border security enhancements, this
appropriations bill is not the place for that debate. No matter what
side of this debate you are on, most of us agree that the American
immigration system is badly broken. Comprehensive immigration reform is
long overdue. We need a balanced immigration system that is fair.
My strong preference is that Congress send the President a
comprehensive immigration reform bill that he can sign into law. This
would provide a more thorough and more permanent solution than
Executive action. The Senate passed a bipartisan bill in the last
Congress, and I am sure we can do so again. My hope is that the House
will take it up soon so we can come together in a bipartisan way,
reconcile our differences, and pass comprehensive immigration reform as
a separate bill.
Funding for the Department of Homeland Security expires Friday,
February 27, which is now less than 3 weeks away. We are not scheduled
to be in session one of those weeks because of the district work
period. The Senate should act now to pass a clean Homeland Security
bill and send it to the President without further delay. That is in the
best interest of the American people.
With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Cruz). The Senator from Texas.
[[Page S882]]
____________________