[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 23 (Tuesday, February 6, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S619-S622]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                                  DACA

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to speak of an 
issue which really defines America. With the exception of Native 
Americans who preceded us, with the exception of many African Americans 
who were brought here in bondage, virtually all of the rest of us are 
the sons and daughters of immigrants to America, immigrants from 
literally all over the world who have come to this Nation and made us 
different--different in a positive way. They have given life to this 
democracy. They have given hope when it comes to our future. They have 
inspired us.
  I will be the first to admit that I do not come to this debate 
without strong personal feelings. Like millions of Americans, I am the 
son of an immigrant. In 1911--107 years ago--my grandmother came to 
this country with three little kids. One of those kids was my mother. 
She was 2 years old when their ship landed in Baltimore. My grandmother 
didn't speak a word of English, but somehow she managed to take those 
three kids and make her way to join my grandfather in East St. Louis, 
IL.
  On the credenza behind my desk in the Capitol is my mother's 
naturalization certificate. I keep that as a reminder of my heritage. 
That is my story. That is my family's story. That is America's story. 
Because of my family history, I really believe in immigration. I 
believe it has been a positive force in America.
  I remember going to Jurbarkas, Lithuania, which was a tiny village in 
1911, and being taken on a tour of my mom's birthplace. She never made 
it back there, but I was able to see the church where she was baptized. 
They pointed out the well in the town square which people used. I 
thought to myself what it must have been like that evening when my 
grandparents called their friends and relatives together to tell them 
the news: They were leaving their home in Lithuania. They were leaving 
the church that had served their family for generations. They were 
leaving all of their friends and relatives. They were leaving behind 
every stick of furniture, the dogs, the cats, the chickens--
everything--to go to a place where they didn't speak the language. They 
were going to this place called America. They had heard great stories 
about the land of opportunity, and they had heard about some 
Lithuanians who had gone to the city of East St. Louis, IL, and that is 
where they were headed.
  I am sure those friends and relatives, walking away from that 
meeting, turned to one another and said: What ever got into their 
minds? They are giving up everything to go to a place where they don't 
even speak the language. They will be back.
  Well, they never returned. Like millions and millions of Americans, 
they had the courage to come to America and to weather crisis after 
crisis in our family and to build a future. I stand here because of 
that decision.
  How can you tell when a country is in decline? When immigrants stop 
wanting to come to that country, when they can't wait to leave that 
country. Many other developed countries have had this experience and 
watched their economies decline as a result. That has never been our 
experience in the history of America.
  Look at our history. In every generation, immigrants have come to our

[[Page S620]]

shores from around the world and made us a better and stronger nation. 
Immigrants are not a drain on America; immigrants are the future of 
America. They are hard-working men and women who leave behind 
everything they know to build a new and better life for themselves and 
their children. They breathe new life into our country and help 
revitalize the American dream.
  You have heard the stories. They go to Silicon Valley and take a look 
at some of the best and brightest when it comes to high-tech, and they 
marvel at how many of them were immigrants to this country who were 
finally able to take that great idea and turn it into a great business 
with a lot of well-paid employees, helping this country move forward.
  It was 17 years ago that I introduced a bill called the DREAM Act. It 
was bipartisan legislation that gave a path to citizenship to 
immigrants who came to the United States as children. These young 
people have come to be known as Dreamers.
  I know the President went to a Republican retreat last week and 
mocked the term ``Dreamers.'' He did the same in the State of the Union 
address. I will tell you, I am proud of the term ``Dreamers.'' Before 
this bill was introduced, if you asked about Dreamers and who they 
were, most people would answer: Isn't that a British rock group? Today, 
Dreamers symbolize something in America--young people brought here who 
have grown up pledging allegiance to that flag, singing the only 
national anthem they ever have known, who want to be part of our 
future. Those are Dreamers.
  Eight years ago, I sent a letter to President Obama. Dick Lugar, 
Republican Senator from Indiana, joined me in signing that letter. On a 
bipartisan basis, we asked for President Obama to find a way to protect 
the Dreamers. The President responded to our request. He established 
the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program, better known as 
DACA.

  DACA provides temporary legal status to Dreamers if they step up, 
identify themselves, register with the government, pay a $500 filing 
fee, and submit themselves to a criminal background check and then a 
national security background check. If they passed all of those things, 
under DACA, they were given temporary, renewable 2-year protection to 
stay in the United States, not be deported, and have the legal right to 
work.
  DACA has been an extraordinary success. Almost 800,000 Dreamers have 
come forward and received DACA protection. It has allowed them to 
contribute more to this country that they love, as teachers and nurses 
and engineers and first responders and members of our military. Yes, 
these DACA individuals have stepped up, even though they do not have 
the legal rights of citizenship, raised their hands, and sworn to put 
their lives on the line for America. How many of us have done that? We 
should admire them for their commitment to this country. Instead, on 
September 5, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced that the Trump 
administration was putting an end to this DACA Program. That same day, 
the President called on Congress to ``legalize DACA.''
  Now the deportation clock is literally ticking on these young people. 
As we gather here today, more than 18,000 of these young people have 
lost their protection under DACA. Beginning in less than a month, on 
March 5 of this year, every day for the next 2 years, 1,000 Dreamers 
will lose their work permits and be subject to deportation because of 
President Trump's decision.
  The administration itself has warned us that if we do come up with 
legalization of DACA, they need time--maybe as long as 6 months--to 
make it work. What has Congress done in response to this challenge, in 
response to the fact that thousands of young people are losing this 
protection? The answer is one word: nothing. Nothing. Not a single bill 
has passed the Senate or the House in response to the President's 
challenge, despite the fact that every single day 122 of these 
Dreamers, because of President Trump's decision, lose the protection of 
DACA. Teachers--almost 20,000 of them nationwide who are DACA 
recipients--are going to be in a situation where they have to leave 
behind their classrooms and their students. Nurses will be forced to 
leave behind their patients because of President Trump's decision. 
First responders, who have written an enviable record of courage in 
serving their communities, will be forced to leave those posts. 
Soldiers willing to die for America will be forced to leave the Army--
forced to leave the Army they have volunteered to serve.
  This isn't just a looming humanitarian crisis; it is an economic 
crisis as well. More than 91 percent of DACA Dreamers are gainfully 
employed and paying taxes to our government. The nonpartisan Institute 
on Taxation and Economic Policy reports that DACA-eligible individuals 
contribute an estimated $2 billion a year in State and local taxes. The 
Cato Institute, a conservative think tank, estimates that ending DACA 
and deporting DACA recipients will cost $60 billion and result in a 
$280 billion reduction in economic growth over the next decade. Are the 
DACA protectees a drain on society? Not according to the conservative 
Cato Institute. They are a plus for America, a plus for our economy.
  Poll after poll shows overwhelming bipartisan support for the 
Dreamers. Even FOX News--no liberal media outlet--found that 79 percent 
of Americans support a path to citizenship for Dreamers. That includes 
63 percent of those who identify as Trump voters.
  When the Trump administration shut down the DACA Program, the 
President called on Congress to legalize the program. We have done 
nothing. The day after repealing DACA, President Trump reached a 
tentative agreement on DACA and border security with Senator Schumer, 
the Senate Democratic leader, and Nancy Pelosi, the House Democratic 
leader. President Trump said: ``Chuck and Nancy would like to see 
something happen, and so do I.'' But very quickly, President Trump 
walked away from those words.
  In October, the White House released 7 pages of what they called 
``Immigration Principles''--their wish list when it came to 
immigration. It was a list of hard-line, anti-immigrant proposals, many 
of which have been opposed by both political parties in Congress. Then, 
4 weeks ago, I was invited to a meeting on January 9 at the White 
House, to sit next to President Trump and about two dozen Members of 
Congress. The President said at that meeting, broadcast on live 
television, that he wanted to protect DACA recipients and he would sign 
any bipartisan bill that Congress sent to him. The President said: Send 
me a bill and I will sign it, and I will take the political heat. I 
heard it. So did America. He also said that Congress should first pass 
DACA legislation and that other immigration issues should wait for 
``phase two, which would be comprehensive.'' That was good news for me 
and good news for Senator Lindsey Graham, a Republican from South 
Carolina. We had been working for 4 months on a bipartisan plan.
  We came back to the Hill after that meeting on January 9. That 
evening and the next day, we hammered out an agreement--six Senators, 
three Democrats and three Republicans. We called the President on 
January 11. I personally called him to tell him we had a bill, a 
bipartisan bill. I wanted him to hear about it, to know the details, 
and I hoped that it would solve the problem and challenge that we 
faced. It was a real compromise. The day after we finalized that 
agreement, after the House meeting, we addressed all of the priorities 
that the President had laid before us, including protection for the 
Dreamers and a significant, multibillion-dollar downpayment on our 
border security.

  The President said he looked forward to Senator Graham's briefing him 
on that plan and would be back in touch with me. Then I received word, 
within minutes, that the President wanted me to join Senator Graham in 
going to the White House. Two hours later, Senator Lindsey Graham and I 
were at the White House, hoping that the President might embrace our 
bipartisan plan, but we were surprised and disappointed when we entered 
the Oval Office. In a matter of an hour and a half, five of the 
congressional hard-liners on immigration had been invited in to shoot 
down our plan. The President's views, in a matter of less than 2 hours, 
had changed radically.
  During our meeting, the President demanded $20 billion to build a 
wall on our southern border. He kept saying

[[Page S621]]

over and over: Give me $20 billion. I will build this wall in 1 year. 
The President reacted negatively to the agreement that we had reached 
in terms of protecting immigrants from Haiti from deportation and 
ensuring that immigrants from Africa would be permitted to come to our 
country. What I heard at that meeting had nothing to do with security 
and American jobs. It was a sad commentary by the President on his 
vision of immigration.
  Then, 2 weeks ago, Senator Schumer, our Democratic leader, made 
another good-faith attempt to work with the White House. He made a 
generous offer to President Trump to fund the border wall, but after a 
promising meeting, within 2 hours, the President called and withdrew 
any offer. That was the third time Senate Democrats had offered to fund 
President Trump's wall in exchange for the Dream Act. In other words, 
we have been willing to support a broadly unpopular and partisan 
proposal--the wall--in exchange for a broadly popular and bipartisan 
proposal--the Dream Act. The President will not take ``yes'' for an 
answer. It is no wonder that Senator Schumer has said that trying to 
reach an immigration agreement with the President is ``like trying to 
negotiate with Jell-O.''
  Two weeks ago, the White House released a 1-page ``Framework on 
Immigration Reform & Border Security.'' The White House claims this is 
a compromise because it includes a path to citizenship for some 
Dreamers. I might add that it is an issue that is supported by the 
overwhelming majority of American people. The plan would put the 
administration's entire hard-line immigration agenda on the backs of 
these young people.
  For example, the White House wants to dramatically reduce legal 
immigration by prohibiting American citizens from sponsoring their 
parents, siblings, and adult or married children as immigrants. We are 
talking about, literally, millions of relatives of American citizens 
who have done the right thing, followed our immigration laws, and have 
been waiting patiently in line for as long as 20 years to come to the 
United States.
  Listen to what the Cato Institute says about the White House 
proposal:

       [I]n the most likely scenario, the new plan would cut the 
     number of legal immigrants by up to 44 percent or half a 
     million immigrants annually--the largest policy-driven legal 
     immigration cut since the 1920s. Compared to current law, it 
     would exclude--[the President's proposal]--nearly 22 million 
     people from the opportunity to immigrate legally to the 
     United States over the next [50 years].

  This proposal would gut the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act, 
which established our current immigration system, with its focus on 
reuniting families.
  When you think about the bedrock principles of America--faith, 
family, love of country--why would we assault this effort to unify and 
strengthen our families in America with those who are following this 
process in a legal manner?
  The 1965 law, which this would change dramatically, replaced the 
strict national origin quotas of the 1924 immigration law. The 1924 
immigration law was written to specifically exclude people whom the 
Congress and President, in those days, thought should not be part of 
America's future. They were focusing on people from my part of the 
world. My family came from the Baltics. They focused on the Baltics and 
Eastern European countries--to restrict their immigration to this 
country. Luckily for me, my family got over before the 1924 law. They 
also wanted to exclude Italians in their belief that we had had enough 
from that country, and they wanted to exclude Jews. That is what that 
1924 National Security Act was about.
  When President Lyndon Johnson signed the 1965 law, he said: ``It 
corrects a cruel and enduring wrong. . . . For over four decades the 
immigration policy of the United States has been twisted and distorted 
by the harsh injustice of the national origins quota system.''
  Listen to what Presidential Calvin Coolidge said when he signed the 
1924 law, the last major reduction in legal immigration in America:

       There are racial considerations too grave to be brushed 
     aside. Biological laws tell us that certain people will not 
     mix or blend. The Nordics propagate themselves successfully. 
     With other races, the outcome shows deterioration on both 
     sides.

  I cannot understand why Attorney General Sessions, at one point, 
praised that 1924 law and said it was ``good for America.''
  The President's immigration framework would also fast-track the 
deportations of women and children who come to our border in their 
fleeing gang and sexual violence. Since our tragic failure during World 
War II to aid Jewish refugees who fled the Holocaust, the United States 
has led the world, since then, in providing a safe haven to people who 
flee war, terrorism, and persecution. Now we are in the midst of the 
worst refugee crisis on record, with 65 million people worldwide being 
forcibly displaced, including child refugees from Central America, the 
Northern Triangle, who are fleeing horrific violence.

  Consider the opinion of General John Kelly back in 2015, the current 
White House Chief of Staff, when he headed the U.S. Southern Command. 
General Kelly said then that the children from Central America who are 
arriving on the U.S.-Mexico border are ``the direct result of our drug 
consumption'' in the United States. General Kelly said, ``In many ways 
[parents] are trying to save their children'' from the violence in 
their own countries. General Kelly was right in 2015.
  In the past, Democrats have supported some of the President's 
proposals, like changes in our family immigration system and 
eliminating the diversity visa lottery. I might remind my colleagues 
that that was all part of a significantly comprehensive immigration 
reform bill.
  I was part of the Gang of 8 that drafted the original bill--four 
Republicans, four Democrats. We brought that bill to this floor in 2013 
and won a vote--68 to 32. The bill was a product of months of 
negotiations and compromise. Unfortunately, the Republican leadership 
in the House of Representatives refused to even consider it.
  Now we are being asked to accept this administration's proposals with 
no conditions and no give-and-take. If the administration wants to 
reform our legal immigration system, we have some priorities that we 
care for as well.
  If we are talking about protecting national security, why aren't we 
closing the loopholes in the Visa Waiver Program? There are 20 million 
people from 38 nations who travel to America every year on the Visa 
Waiver Program--one-third of all of the visitors to the United States. 
They arrive in American airports without undergoing biometric checks or 
consular interviews. Zacarias Moussaoui, the so-called 20th hijacker of 
9/11, tried to enter the U.S. through the Visa Waiver Program. So did 
Richard Reid, the Shoe Bomber. We should strengthen the Visa Waiver 
Program by requiring biometric checks of travelers before they land in 
America so that we know who they are before they board the airplanes.
  If you are really sincere about the security of our Nation, this is 
an obvious need. Congress should also close the loophole that lets 
people enter the United States through the Visa Waiver Program. 
Remember, there are 20 million a year. We allow them to buy guns, even 
assault weapons, even if they are on the FBI's terrorist watch list. 
When it comes to security, that is an obvious loophole that needs to be 
closed.
  With the President's failing to lead, the responsibility to fix the 
DACA crisis falls on our shoulders here in Congress.
  I see my colleague from Texas, Senator Cornyn. He and I have talked 
extensively about this. I still hold out hope that we may be able to 
find some way to resolve this in a bipartisan fashion. We have to do it 
because, to date, Congress--the Senate and the House--have done 
nothing.
  Three weeks ago, a bipartisan group of Senate Republicans and 
Democrats finally persuaded Senator McConnell, the Republican leader, 
to commit to addressing DACA. I salute him for doing that. He made a 
statement on the floor twice, unequivocally, that we would bring this 
measure up if we had not reached an agreement by this Friday and that 
we would consider starting with what he called a level playing field--
amendments on both sides--on the issue of immigration and DACA. We 
haven't seen that kind of debate on the floor of the U.S. Senate in 
over 1 year.

[[Page S622]]

  If it comes to that, I look forward to it. I would like to see the 
Senate work its will, and I hope that we will come up with a positive 
and constructive compromise. We have only 3 days from today for that 
process to start, and I hope that we can make some progress. Bipartisan 
legislation to protect the Dreamers has been pending in Congress, and 
it has overwhelming support from the people we represent, including 
President Trump's own voters. It would pass on a strong bipartisan vote 
in both the House and the Senate if Republican leaders would bring it 
to a vote.
  I look forward to that debate.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority whip.

                          ____________________