[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 120 (Tuesday, July 17, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4978-S4979]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                  Immigration and Customs Enforcement

  Mr. President, I wish to say a few words about this misguided effort 
to abolish ICE, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. This is the 
operational component of the Department of Homeland Security. We have 
seen this movement in hashtags on Instagram, on T-shirts. We have 
watched protestors who showed up in California when ICE agents were 
trying to investigate the trafficking of children. Can you imagine 
these protestors interfering with an investigation into the crime of 
human trafficking of children? But that is not all. Some of the House 
Democrats have introduced legislation to eliminate ICE.
  Of course, any sensible person would tell you that eliminating ICE is 
reckless, which is why I recently introduced a resolution with 14 of 
our colleagues denouncing these radical calls in the strongest of 
terms. This is just reckless and naive, this ``Abolish ICE'' movement. 
It is a move that would be fundamentally irresponsible.
  Based on one recent poll, close to 70 percent of the American people, 
when asked about it, opposed the idea--and for good reason. ICE was 
created, after all, in 2003 in response to the discovery that many of 
the 9/11 hijackers had exploited holes in our immigration enforcement 
and overstayed their tourist visas and attended flight schools without 
a proper visa. We know what happened on that terrible day, 9/11/2001. 
We know that hundreds of thousands of foreign nationals overstay their 
visas every year illegally. Without ICE, those unlawfully residing in 
our country, in violation of their visas, would be allowed to stay 
indefinitely. Is that what the ``Abolish ICE'' movement is about--
eliminating enforcement of our immigration laws and allowing people who 
flout those laws to succeed in staying here in the United States in 
violation of those immigration laws?
  Of course, abolishing ICE would mean ending all of the agency's 
programs and functions. It would mean allowing

[[Page S4979]]

dangerous criminals, including potential terrorists who are in our 
country, to remain here. It would mean scrapping the ICE Cyber Crime 
Center's investigation of child exploitation online. It would mean 
ending the ICE Blue Campaign to rescue human trafficking victims and 
provide them with a safe place to stay and other services. The Blue 
Campaign was just unanimously authorized by Congress, by the way, this 
year, and abolishing ICE would eliminate it. Abolishing ICE would mean 
doing away with the unit that focuses on human rights violators and war 
crimes. That unit is currently pursuing close to 2,000 leads. It would 
eliminate initiatives like Operation Community Shield, which combats 
the proliferation of transnational criminal gangs.
  I hope our colleagues understand what they are encouraging when they 
say we should abolish ICE. I think it is incumbent on them to explain 
their rationale to the hard-working officials who are on the 
frontlines, fighting against human trafficking, child exploitation, and 
illegal immigration. What do they have to say to those people who risk 
their safety--perhaps even their lives--to enforce those important 
laws, much less to those whose jobs would be on the line?
  There are some important statistics relating to Homeland Security 
Investigations, which is a critical part of ICE, that our Democratic 
friends who are encouraging the abolition of ICE should know about: 
8,887, which is the number of visa applications that Homeland Security 
refused based on terrorist connections or other derogatory information; 
904, which is the number of sexually exploited children identified and/
or rescued by Homeland Security in 2017; 3,945, which is the number of 
cases initiated based on human smuggling last year; 4,735, which is the 
number of transnational gang members arrested in the United States in 
2017; and 980,000, which is the number of pounds of narcotics Homeland 
Security Investigations seized in 2017, which included thousands of 
pounds of deadly drugs--like fentanyl--that help fuel the opioid 
crisis.
  ICE plays a leading role in all of these areas. If the critics were 
to get their wish and if ICE were abolished, the numbers for all of 
these items would be zero because Homeland Security Investigations 
could not exist without ICE.
  There is more. Think about the close to 33,000 criminal arrests made 
by Homeland Security Investigations last year--90 criminal arrests each 
day. Without ICE, these criminals would still be on the streets, 
endangering our communities. The $524 million in illicit currency that 
was seized would be back in circulation, being used in illegal 
transactions. There were 7,000 pounds of heroin, 57,000 pounds of 
methamphetamines, and 260,000 pounds of cocaine impounded last year. 
That poison would all be back on the market and being sold in our 
communities.
  I hope our colleagues who are calling for the abolition of ICE are 
prepared to explain their reasoning for abolishing an agency that 
combats illegal drug sales and online exploitation and helps protect 
our Nation's borders. My respectful suggestion would be that they need 
to spend a little more time thanking these public servants for the 
critical role ICE plays in keeping all of us safe. Maybe they should 
spend a little time getting to know the ICE officers who go to work 
every day and do their duty, protecting our country.
  Earlier this month, Vice President Pence talked about this. He 
reiterated President Trump's words of support--that the men and women 
of ICE are incredible people. These include the more than 20,000 
investigators, field officers, special agents, and analysts, who, as 
the Vice President said, ``stand up for the rule of law in this 
nation.''
  Every day, ICE confronts criminal illegal immigrants who endanger our 
communities. They fight vicious gangs like MS-13 and stop human 
smugglers and child traffickers, sometimes endangering their own 
safety.
  In 2017, the Vice President pointed out that attacks on Customs and 
Border Protection agents had increased by nearly 75 percent. 
Deliberately fostering resentment, anger, and contempt for ICE and our 
other law enforcement officials obviously puts our officers in 
additional danger. This is reckless, not to mention, again, dangerous.
  ICE critics try to justify their calls by pointing out the situation 
at the border in which certain families were separated but are now in 
the process of being reunited. We all agree these families should be 
reunited, and I know the Presiding Officer has authored important 
legislation to change the law to make sure that families are kept 
together when they come across the border and claim asylum. But then 
there are cases processed in an expedited fashion in front of an 
immigration judge, so if they have some legitimate claim to asylum or 
immigration benefits, they can get that heard.
  Also, one of the objectives, of course, is to eliminate the failed 
catch-and-release policies of the past, which have done nothing but 
encourage additional illegal immigration and reward criminal 
organizations for whom this is a business model, exploiting gaps in our 
immigration laws. Unfortunately, when we have Members of Congress who 
resist fixing those gaps, filling those gaps, and solving the problem, 
it does nothing but enrich these criminal organizations for whom this 
is gold.
  It is clear that the situation at our border is a crisis. In 2014, 
President Obama called it a humanitarian crisis when tens of thousands 
of unaccompanied children came across the border, and that continues 
today because we haven't fixed the problem on a bipartisan basis, even 
though those solutions are readily available.
  Those who criticize the enforcement of our immigration laws, the so-
called zero tolerance policy, have focused on separating families. So 
what we have tried to do, since we all agree families should not be 
separated, is to provide a means for those once separated to be 
reunited and detained in appropriate facilities and have their cases 
heard on an expedited basis before an immigration judge. Not fixing the 
problem will simply encourage more of the same.
  Unfortunately, as I said, our colleagues who refuse to be part of the 
solution actually are part of the problem. We know who wins in this 
game; it is the criminal organizations who are, as one expert said, 
``commodity agnostic.'' They will traffic in children; they will 
traffic in guns; they will traffic in drugs--anything that makes them a 
buck. This is a very, very lucrative business model for them. 
Unfortunately, when we don't fix the problem by plugging the holes, we 
are unwittingly helping to support that business model
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah.