    [Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 6 (Wednesday, January 10, 2018)]
    [Senate]
    [Pages S114-S115]
    From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                             Funding the Government

      Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, we have barely over a week to negotiate a
    broad package of must-pass items, including an extension of government
    funding, a deal to lift the spending caps for both defense and urgent
    domestic priorities, a healthcare package, disaster aid, an agreement
    to protect the Dreamers, and to provide additional border security.
      The path forward on some of these issues is very clear. There are
    significant bipartisan majorities that would vote to extend CHIP, or
    the Children's Health Insurance Program, and community health centers.
    There seems to be a growing consensus on how we can pass the 702 FISA
    Court program.
      I am also confident that we could assemble a disaster aid package
    that addresses the needs of all of the States and Territories--Texas,
    Florida, Louisiana, California, the Western States that have been
    plagued by fires, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands--as well as
    modifying what the Forest Service does so they don't spend all of their
    money simply fighting forest fires and not do the job they are intended
    to do, which is to prevent future forest fires by careful forestry
    programs.
      Even where the path is murkier, the outlines of a deal exist. If we
    don't lift the spending caps in short order, the sharp ax of
    sequestration will fall on the military side of the budget and on the
    domestic side of the budget. That is a scenario everyone wants to
    avoid.
      The majority leader continues to insist that we should raise the
    budget caps unequally, sparing our military but not critical domestic
    programs that create jobs, grow our economy, and help the middle class.
    We Democrats believe we absolutely must provide the resources our men
    and women overseas need to protect our country. We believe that
    strongly, but we also know that there are many important issues here at
    home--combating the opioid crisis, improving veterans' healthcare,
    shoring up pensions for millions of hard-working Americans who are
    approaching retirement, and dealing with rural development and rural
    broadband. These items are all crucial to the middle class.
      The deadly scourge of opioid addiction has contributed to the first
    consecutive-year decline in life expectancy in the great United States
    of America since the early 1960s. That is an astounding and alarming
    fact that should rouse everyone in this Chamber to action. It is not
    occurring in most of our Western country allies.
      Some of our veterans have been waiting in line for healthcare at
    veterans hospitals for over a year. These men and women served our
    country bravely. We have a solemn responsibility to serve them when
    they come home, and we are not living up to that responsibility right
    now.
      Over a million Americans paid into pension plans with the expectation
    that they could retire with basic dignity. For so many of them--
    teamsters, miners, food workers--pensions have fallen short, and a
    lifetime of careful savings may be ripped away from pensioners at the
    last moment. We could make progress on each of these issues through a
    budget that lifts the spending caps equally for defense and nondefense.
      The Republican majority, which conveniently forgot its long history
    of opposing deficits when passing a $1.5 trillion tax bill, cannot, in
    good conscience, turn around and complain about deficits here. So let's
    make the investments we all know are essential in both our military and
    in our middle class.
      Even on the most challenging issue we face, the fate of the Dreamers,
    there appears to be a path forward. Yesterday's immigration meeting at
    the White House was encouraging for two reasons. First, practically
    everyone at the table--including some of the most conservative voices
    on immigration, like the Senator from Iowa--agreed that we must resolve
    the future of Dreamers by passing DACA protections into law. That is a
    very positive development.
      Second, President Trump appeared to endorse a narrow deal to protect
    the Dreamers, leaving the thornier issues for a later debate on
    comprehensive immigration reform--a debate that, personally, I would
    welcome, the sooner the better.
      But first, we have to do this narrow deal. President Trump also
    backed off his demand that a DACA deal include an expensive and
    ineffective border wall across the entire length of the southern
    border. Of course, the devil is in the details. We Democrats have
    repeated time and again that we are ready, willing, and eager to
    support an effective, practical border security measure in a deal that
    enshrines DACA into law. The President yesterday seemed to agree with
    that. We agree with that. For these reasons, the meeting was
    encouraging.
      Last night, a Federal judge ruled against the Trump administration's
    handling of the termination of the DACA Program. Let me be very clear.
    The ruling last night in no way diminishes the urgency of resolving the
    DACA issue. On this we agree with the White House, which says the
    ruling doesn't do anything to reduce Congress's obligation to address
    this problem now. A court case, of course, is no guarantee of lasting
    security. A higher court can quickly overturn it. Unsurprisingly, the
    Department of Justice responded to the ruling last night by saying that
    it ``will continue to vigorously defend [this] position, and looks
    forward to vindicating its position in further legislation.'' So the
    fact remains that the only way to guarantee the legal status for
    Dreamers is to pass DACA protections into law and to do it now. For
    that reason, a resolution to the DACA issue must be part of a global
    deal on the budget.
      We cannot tolerate delay. Delay is a tactic employed by those who do
    not wish to see a deal. Let me just say, promises that maybe in the
    future we will do it--particularly on immigration--have vanished by the
    wayside.

    [[Page S115]]

    Unless DACA is on a must-pass deal--a must-pass bill--in terms of a
    global agreement, people are rightfully skeptical that it will ever
    happen. Somehow, somewhere, someone will say: I can't do it.
      Let's not forget that the House has been a graveyard even for
    immigration proposals that have had bipartisan consensus here in the
    Senate. So it must be on a must-pass bill. Otherwise, we are not going
    to get it.
      Congressional negotiators and the valiant group here in the Senate
    led by Senators Durbin and Graham are focused on this issue right now.
    The meeting they had yesterday--I talked to both Senators Durbin and
    Graham last night and this morning--provides a clearer picture of the
    parameters of the deal. The iron is hot. We should strike now. Delay
    will snuff out the hope of getting an agreement that both sides can
    live with. Let us press forward. Each side is going to have to give.

      I am confident, though, that both sides can come to an agreement on
    border security. I am convinced now both sides want to find a consensus
    on DACA. Some will support a deal enthusiastically, others reluctantly,
    but, nonetheless, an agreement is within reach. We ought to get it done
    through the Senate, through the House, and onto the President's desk
    for signature now. So let's get the job done.
      I yield the floor.
      The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.