[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 102 (Tuesday, June 19, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4249-S4251]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  ENERGY AND WATER, LEGISLATIVE BRANCH, AND MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND 
          VETERANS AFFAIRS APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2019--Continued

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate 
resume consideration of H.R. 5895.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


   Amendments Nos. 2943, as Modified, and 2985 to Amendment No. 2910

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
following amendments be called up en bloc: Crapo No. 2943, as modified, 
and Baldwin No. 2985. I further ask consent that at 10 a.m. on 
Wednesday, June 20, the Senate vote in relation to the Crapo and 
Baldwin amendments in the order listed; finally, that there be no 
second-degree amendments in order to the amendments prior to the votes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The clerk will report the amendments en bloc.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Kentucky [Mr. McConnell], for others, 
     proposes amendments numbered 2943, as modified, and 2985 to 
     amendment No. 2910.

  The amendments are as follows:


                    AMENDMENT NO. 2943, as modified

    (Purpose: To increase funds for a nuclear demonstration program)

       On page 24, line 2, strike the period at the end and insert 
     the following: ``: Provided  further, That of the funds made 
     available under this heading, $15,000,000 shall be for a 
     material recovery demonstration project to provide high assay 
     enriched low uranium to support advanced reactors.''.


                           AMENDMENT NO. 2985

(Purpose: To set aside funds for cooperative agreements and laboratory 
    support to accelerate the domestic production of Molybdenum-99)

       On page 32, line 16, strike the period at the end and 
     insert the following: ``: Provided, That of the amounts 
     appropriated under this heading, $20,000,000 shall be for 
     cooperative agreements and laboratory support to accelerate 
     the domestic production of Molybdenum-99.''.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Colorado.


                        Forced Family Separation

  Mr. BENNET. Mr. President, this past April, Attorney General Sessions 
announced a new zero tolerance policy--those were his words--for the 
southern border. Last month, the Chief of Staff to the President said 
that this new zero tolerance policy ``could be a tough deterrent. . . . 
The children will be taken care of--put into foster care or whatever.'' 
That is what he said. To justify his zero tolerance policy, Attorney 
General Sessions cited Romans 8, a Bible passage that was used 
throughout our history to justify human slavery.
  The administration knew precisely what the effect of this action 
would be; yet they did it anyway. The result is that over 2,300 
children have been separated by the U.S. Government in the name of the 
American people since May.
  The results are the images we see of children caged in chain-link 
enclosures. We hear it in the young boys and girls crying for their 
parents--all done in the name of America. That is an image that has 
ricocheted all across the world, just as the image of Bull Connor's 
dogs tearing at Birmingham's children ricocheted across the world. It 
said to the world that we actually weren't upholding the high ideals 
that our Founders set out to create.
  Well, that is terrible, but what is also terrible is that President 
Trump will take no responsibility for what he has done and instead 
takes on a cheap political tactic, which I think he thinks he can get 
away with. There is a lot of evidence he will get away with it because 
of the repetition on cable news that somehow Democrats are responsible 
for this. The President said:

       I hate the children being taken away. The Democrats have to 
     change their law. That's their law.

  That statement is false. It has no basis in reality. And I will 
presume that he is not using the children as a negotiating tool. I am 
not going to come to the floor and make that accusation. There are 
people who have said that because they are searching for some logic to 
explain how he could say something that is so false.

  He tweeted: ``The Democrats are forcing the breakup of families at 
the Border with their horrible and cruel legislative agenda.'' That is 
what he wrote. That is ridiculous, and we know it is false because 
until they created this zero tolerance policy, which they thought would 
deter other immigrants, the United States of America handled this 
matter in a way that managed to enforce our laws without doing hideous 
violence to our bedrock values as a nation.
  When migrants with children cross the border unlawfully, the 
government has broad discretion about whether to charge the violation 
as a criminal offense or a civil offense, and every American 
administration--every American administration, including the Trump 
administration until 6 weeks ago, dealt with it as a civil matter and 
avoided the trauma of family separation by charging them for illegal 
entry and deporting them.
  During the first 15 months of this administration, until Attorney 
General Sessions started this zero tolerance policy, the Trump 
administration--not the Obama administration--did this with nearly 
100,000 immigrants who were apprehended at the U.S.-Mexico border.
  In terms of the law, nothing has changed in 6 months. The only thing 
which has changed is the administration's policy and their decision to 
file criminal charges for every unlawful crossing, including cases that 
involved families with young children. I think that is the wrong 
policy.
  By the way, the Attorney General doesn't make up stories about it is 
the Democrats' fault. He said this is what will happen because of their 
policy, but the President will not admit it. American citizens, thank 
goodness, don't want this done in their name. They don't want our 
history besmirched by

[[Page S4250]]

this action and the coverup of whose responsibility it is. That is why 
a bipartisan group--a bipartisan group--of 75 former U.S. attorneys 
called for an end to the policy of family separation. It is making 
their exercise of prosecutorial discretion more difficult.
  More than two dozen of the largest religious groups in America have 
asked the President to please relent, knowing he has the power to do 
so--Rev. Franklin Graham and nearly a dozen evangelical leaders, 
Republican Governors, Republican colleagues of mine who have not only 
said they detest the policy but that the President can change it 
anytime he wants.
  Those are the facts. I don't know how to solve the problem of 
newscasters who are willing to repeat things that aren't true. That is 
hard to do, and it is difficult to separate fact from fiction when we 
have a President who is allergic to the truth.
  For my own sake, at times like this, I think it is important to 
listen to voices like First Lady Laura Bush, who wrote an op-ed in the 
Washington Post last week that was so moving. It amazes me that, in 
2017, any American citizen would have to write it, but thank goodness 
she did.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Mrs. Bush's op-ed piece 
be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

               [From the Washington Post, Jun. 17, 2018]

   Laura Bush: Separating Children From Their Parents at the Border 
                           `Breaks My Heart'

                            (By Laura Bush)

       Laura Bush is a former first lady of the United States.
       On Sunday, a day we as a nation set aside to honor fathers 
     and the bonds of family, I was among the millions of 
     Americans who watched images of children who have been torn 
     from their parents. In the six weeks between April 19 and May 
     31, the Department of Homeland Security has sent nearly 2,000 
     children to mass detention centers or foster care. More than 
     100 of these children are younger than 4 years old. The 
     reason for these separations is a zero-tolerance policy for 
     their parents, who are accused of illegally crossing our 
     borders.
       I live in a border state. I appreciate the need to enforce 
     and protect our international boundaries, but this zero-
     tolerance policy is cruel. It is immoral. And it breaks my 
     heart.
       Our government should not be in the business of warehousing 
     children in converted box stores or making plans to place 
     them in tent cities in the desert outside of El Paso. These 
     images are eerily reminiscent of the internment camps for 
     U.S. citizens and noncitizens of Japanese descent during 
     World War II, now considered to have been one of the most 
     shameful episodes in U.S. history. We also know that this 
     treatment inflicts trauma; those who have been interned have 
     been twice as likely to suffer cardiovascular disease or die 
     prematurely than those who were not interned.
       Americans pride ourselves on being a moral nation, on being 
     the nation that sends humanitarian relief to places 
     devastated by natural disasters or famine or war. We pride 
     ourselves on believing that people should be seen for the 
     content of their character, not the color of their skin. We 
     pride ourselves on acceptance. If we are truly that country, 
     then it is our obligation to reunite these detained children 
     with their parents--and to stop separating parents and 
     children in the first place.
       People on all sides agree that our immigration system isn't 
     working, but the injustice of zero tolerance is not the 
     answer. I moved away from Washington almost a decade ago, but 
     I know there are good people at all levels of government who 
     can do better to fix this.
       Recently, Colleen Kraft, who heads the American Academy of 
     Pediatrics, visited a shelter run by the U.S. Office of 
     Refugee Resettlement. She reported that while there were 
     beds, toys, crayons, a playground and diaper changes, the 
     people working at the shelter had been instructed not to pick 
     up or touch the children to comfort them. Imagine not being 
     able to pick up a child who is not yet out of diapers.
       Twenty-nine years ago, my mother-in-law, Barbara Bush, 
     visited Grandma's House, a home for children with HIV/AIDS in 
     Washington. Back then, at the height of the HIV/AIDS crisis, 
     the disease was a death sentence, and most babies born with 
     it were considered ``untouchables.'' During her visit, 
     Barbara--who was the first lady at the time--picked up a 
     fussy, dying baby named Donovan and snuggled him against her 
     shoulder to soothe him. My mother-in-law never viewed her 
     embrace of that fragile child as courageous. She simply saw 
     it as the right thing to do in a world that can be arbitrary, 
     unkind and even cruel. She, who after the death of her 3-
     year-old daughter knew what it was to lose a child, believed 
     that every child is deserving of human kindness, compassion 
     and love.
       In 2018, can we not as a nation find a kinder, more 
     compassionate and more moral answer to this current crisis? 
     I, for one, believe we can.
  Mr. BENNET. This is what she wrote:

       I live in a border state.

  She lives in Texas.

       I appreciate the need to enforce and protect our 
     international boundaries, but this zero-tolerance policy is 
     cruel. It is immoral. And it breaks my heart.
       Our government should not be in the business of warehousing 
     children in converted box stores or making plans to place 
     them in tent cities in the desert outside of El Paso.

  I am going to read that again. Mrs. Bush wrote: ``Our government 
should not be in the business of warehousing children in converted box 
stores or making plans to place them in tent cities in the desert 
outside of El Paso.'' No, it shouldn't. She wrote:

       These images are eerily reminiscent of the [Japanese 
     American] internment camps . . . of World War II, now 
     considered to have been one of the most shameful episodes in 
     U.S. history.

  We now have another one confronting us right now. That episode was 
shameful. At the time, America was in the midst of a great world war, 
the second in a generation. The country had just emerged from the 
largest economic depression in our country's history. There was deep 
anxiety about jobs and national security, and that anxiety manifested 
in what became a terrible injustice perpetrated by the U.S. Government 
against Japanese Americans.
  President Roosevelt's order called for the relocation of Japanese 
Americans into prison-like camps. Many Governors throughout the West 
opposed the camps at the time not because they were unjust but because 
it was out of bigotry of Japanese Americans. They didn't want them in 
their State, even if they were locked up in a prison.
  Kansas Governor Payne Ratner declared that they ``are not wanted and 
not welcome.'' Wyoming Governor Nels Smith threatened that Japanese who 
come to his State would be found ``hanging from every pine tree.''
  An exception to that was Colorado Governor Ralph Carr, a Republican. 
Speaking to a crowd of farmers, Carr said:

       If you harm them, you must first harm me. I was brought up 
     in small towns where I knew the shame and dishonor of race 
     hatred.

  ``I grew to despise it,'' Carr said, pointing to the crowd, ``because 
it threatened the happiness of you and you and you.'' Carr spoke out 
about that injustice. He gave voice to vulnerable people when it was 
politically unpopular. In fact, he lost his political career as a 
result of what he said. His courage may not have won him much notice or 
applause at the time, but he is in the honor roll of history, and we 
hold him up as an example of our responsibility to stand for justice 
and to stand against cruelty. His example should inspire us, but it 
also should make us wonder what would have happened had he not been 
there.
  Like Governor Carr, all of us have to choose whether we are going to 
stand against a policy of locking up children. We shouldn't do it. We 
didn't do it. The Bush administration didn't do it. The Obama 
administration didn't do it. The Trump administration didn't do it, 
until this so-called zero tolerance policy was put in place. Now, the 
U.S. Government has essentially jailed a bunch of children who can't 
see their parents. This isn't helping the national security of the 
United States.
  Our immigration system is broken. Sitting in that chair before the 
President was the Senator from Florida. He and I worked together in the 
Gang of 8 to write an immigration bill that passed the Senate with 
almost 70 votes in 2013. It spent $40 billion on border security. It 
had internal security. It created a visa system so we could see who was 
here lawfully and who had overstayed their visa and kick out the people 
who were causing trouble. I sometimes think he doesn't actually want a 
wall; he just wants the issue of a wall.
  We could be working with countries in our hemisphere to try to 
resolve the issues they face--violence, corruption, absence of rule of 
law, very limited economic opportunities for people--so people could 
stay there instead of trying to come to the United States just so their 
kids can survive. That would be a useful thing for us to engage in.
  A couple years ago when we had the kids coming to the border, I asked 
myself--I am the parent of three daughters: What would it take for me 
to send one of my daughters, when they are 13 years old, with a drug 
smuggler 1,500

[[Page S4251]]

miles to the U.S. border? What fear would I have had to do that?
  I went down there. I think the President should go down there. I went 
to Mexico and El Salvador and Honduras, and I met in the backyard of 
our Embassy with a bunch of young people who had either tried to get 
into this country and failed or tried to get into this country and 
succeeded. It was very clear they are absolutely terrorized by the gang 
violence down there, by the insistence on the part of gangs that these 
kids join gangs, and by the complete abject lack of economic 
opportunity. There is none. That could affect the national security of 
the United States, and we should have an interest in trying to make it 
better.
  I would put my record on immigration and border security up against 
any single person in this Chamber because I helped write and pass a 
bill that spent $40 billion on border security for the United States. 
Our dysfunction in the House of Representatives caused us not to pass 
the bill there. Now, we have reached a level of even more dysfunction 
because the President is making up what is actually causing the problem 
at the border and enjoys the political theater of going over to the 
House of Representatives and having a conversation with people about 
how we are going to solve a problem he created and that his 
administration created and that Republicans and Democrats in this 
Chamber alike know he created.
  Let me close just by saying that we live in a democratic republic--I 
have said that on the floor--and a democracy will not last very long if 
the government is separated from the people. We are a self-governing 
enterprise. In order to do that well, in order to put America's 
children in the position they deserve to be put in, in order to honor 
the heritage our parents and grandparents passed on to us, in order to 
assure America's leadership role in the world, we have to seek the 
truth as citizens. It is a fundamental responsibility that each of us 
has.
  We don't have to agree with each other about much, but we have to 
find a way to ascertain the truth and then govern toward that and 
figure out ways of moving the country forward. With an episode like 
this, I get more and more worried we are reaching a point where it is 
going to be hard to pull back from the brink.
  When we are living in a time when our President tells us that our 
allies threaten our national security, we need to ascertain the truth 
of that statement. When we are told trade wars are easy to win, and we 
end up paying more for steel than the people we are fighting a trade 
war with, we need to figure out what the truth actually is. When 
somebody runs for office saying they are going to have a beautiful 
healthcare plan that is going to cover everybody in America at a really 
low price, we ought to check and see whether that is happening. When 
somebody tells you--even though it is repeated over and over and over 
again on one cable TV station in America--that he is going to pay off 
the debt in 7 years and then comes to Washington and gives us the 
largest deficit we have seen outside of wartime or recession, we owe it 
to our children to ascertain the truth of the matter.
  We owe it to our children to do that, and we owe it to the world to 
treat the children on our southern border with some dignity--the 
dignity any human being would deserve.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________