[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 122 (Thursday, July 19, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5082-S5083]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, I wish to take this opportunity to express
my support for the 20,000 men and women of Immigration and Customs
Enforcement. They work hard every day to keep drugs off our streets, to
stop human trafficking, to protect our communities from gang violence,
and, yes, to enforce our immigration laws. Theirs can be a thankless
job, but they do it with courage, dedication, and professionalism. So
I, for one, want to say thank you.
I wish to point out the overwhelming support that House Republicans
showed for ICE yesterday, which stands in stark contrast to the
contemptible display put on by House Democrats. On a simple resolution
merely expressing support for the men and women of ICE, only 18
Democrats voted yes, 8 skipped the vote, 34 voted no, and 133 Democrats
voted present, which is the same thing as no. That is a pretty sad
state of affairs. Thirty-four Democrats condemned the men and women of
ICE, and 141 Democrats don't even have the courage of their
conviction--they don't even have the guts to vote yes or no--because we
all know that Democrats, in their heart of hearts, want to abolish ICE.
The way they tell it, ICE is a rogue agency driven by hatred and spite
to tear apart communities.
Congressman Pocan of Wisconsin said that ICE is ``ripping at the
moral fabric of our nation.''
Congresswoman Jayapal of Washington said that ``ICE is out of
control.''
Congressman Blumenauer of Oregon calls ICE ``toxic.''
The senior Senator from Massachusetts said that we should replace ICE
``with something that reflects our values,'' which I suppose means that
the 20,000 men and women of ICE don't measure up to the professor's
definition of our values. I have to ask, isn't the rule of law one of
those values? Because ICE's job is simply to enforce the law and to
protect our citizens from crime.
In the last year alone, ICE arrested more than 125,000 illegal aliens
with criminal records. Those illegal aliens were responsible for more
than 80,000 DUIs, 76,000 dangerous drug offenses, 48,000 assaults,
11,000 weapon offenses, 5,000 sexual assaults, 2,000 kidnappings, and
1,800 homicides. Yes, that is right, almost 2,000 souls would still be
on this Earth but for those illegal alien criminals. ICE's
investigative arm seized more than 980,000 pounds of narcotics last
year. These men and women are on the frontlines of the war on drugs and
the opioid crisis in particular. Do the Democrats really believe we
should put all these efforts on hold?
This call to abolish ICE is so irresponsible that even some
Democrats--those not running for President or beholden to the radical
left--are speaking out against this.
Jeh Johnson, President Obama's former Secretary of Homeland Security,
said that it ``is not a serious policy proposal'' and ``would
compromise public safety.'' He pointed out that even those who opposed
the Vietnam war wouldn't have demanded that we abolish the Department
of Defense.
Eric Holder, President Obama's former Attorney General, said, ``I
don't think that substantively or politically that makes a great deal
of sense,'' calling it ``a gift to Republicans.''
Sarah Saldana, who ran ICE under President Obama, has called it
``nonsensical.''
Perhaps the most insightful comment came from former Senator Joe
Lieberman of Connecticut. He said, ``This makes no sense unless you no
longer want any rules on immigration or customs to be enforced.'' And
that, I would contend, is the whole point.
Those who want to abolish ICE just want open borders. The very bill
House Democrats have introduced to abolish ICE doesn't even say which
Federal agency should assume its critical law enforcement duties. They
leave it up to a commission. The reason, I submit, is that they don't
really care. Their obsession with open borders is so great
[[Page S5083]]
that they are willing to risk public safety to achieve it. These
irresponsible politicians should know better. They aren't worthy to
lead the brave, hard-working men and women of ICE. These officers are
just trying to do their jobs and to keep us safe. On behalf of a
grateful nation, I conclude by again extending them my deepest thanks.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The minority whip.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I join the Senator from Arkansas in
commending those who are involved in law enforcement, risking their
lives for the safety of this Nation at all levels--Federal, State, and
local. They put their badges on every single day and risk their lives
for us, and that is a fact.
Within the Department of Homeland Security, there are men and women
who are conscientiously trying to keep America safe. I commend them as
well. I believe they are doing their job as they understand it, and
they are risking their lives many times to achieve it, not only to stop
the illegal flow of drugs into our country but to deter crime and to
ferret out criminals where possible. They risk their lives to achieve
that goal.
I have not joined in a call for the abolition of ICE, but I will not
join in a call for the adoration of ICE because of one specific issue.
The zero tolerance policy of the Trump administration resulted in our
agents of the Department of Homeland Security forcibly separating
children from their parents--forcibly separating up to 3,000 children
from their parents.
I saw some of those kids separated by that agency. They were toddlers
and infants. Some were being held by the care workers whom I happened
to visit in Chicago. They were little babies taken from their mothers--
toddlers, children 5 and 6 years old, separated by this agency under
the President's zero tolerance policy. There were up to 3,000 of them,
according to the administration's own estimates.
Had that happened before? Only rarely, but it became the policy of
this administration until there was such an uproar in the United States
and around the world that President Trump reversed his position on zero
tolerance.
Reversing the position did not return the children to their parents.
It took Federal courts to do that--one in particular, in San Diego,
where the judge called the representatives of ICE, Health and Human
Services, and all the other agencies involved in these children being
removed forcibly from their parents and gave them deadlines to return
the children to their parents. It was then that we discovered something
about this agency. It was then that we discovered that they didn't keep
a record of the parents and kids.
If you place an order online to Amazon or some other source and the
next day you want to check on the status of your order, you use your
tracking number, and they will tell you where your package is. There
was no tracking number when it came to these kids. If you decide that
you are going to order a pizza and it seems to take a little too long
and you call the pizza parlor, they can generally tell you where the
delivery person is. The same thing is true in so many other areas.
Why, then, did this agency, which my colleagues are now coming to the
floor claiming such great praise for, ignore the obvious? This agency,
the Department of Homeland Security, ended up setting free 3,000
children into care facilities around the United States of America and
didn't keep records of the parents.
We asked them several weeks ago, downstairs--all of the agencies,
including ICE, referred to by the Senator from Arkansas: OK, let's get
down to basics. How many kids are we talking about?
They wouldn't give us a number.
How many kids are under the age of 5? Those are the ones whom you
have a deadline to reunite under the Federal court order in San Diego.
They couldn't give us a number.
Then, how many parents can you identify who actually had their kids
taken away?
ICE said: We can identify 10.
Ten parents, 3,000 kids--I am not making this up. This is exactly
what they said.
They said: We have 10 parents in custody. Those are the ones we can
identify.
Two weeks passed, and we had another briefing this week. The numbers
are now more complete. There are some 2,500 kids separated from their
parents, spread around the United States.
What happened to the parents who lost their children?
The explanation from ICE was that they abandoned their kids and left.
Does that sound reasonable? Does that sound honest? You take the
child away from the arms of a parent and then the parent says: I am
leaving the country.
That might have happened in some cases, for reasons I don't know, but
it is an outrageous suggestion. What it reflects is incompetency. How
in the world can you take a child away from a parent, forcibly take
them away, and not keep an adequate record for their reunification? How
can you do that? Common sense and common decency suggests that you
would do it.
I am not going to join in any resolution applauding that action by
any Federal agency--the Department of Homeland Security, ICE, or other
agencies. To me, it is a stain on the reputation of this Nation, one
that we need to quickly resolve by reuniting these children with their
families as quickly as possible.
You see, it isn't just a question of a holiday for these kids.
Pediatricians have come forward from the American Academy of Pediatrics
and have said that what we have done is institutional abuse of
children.
This separation is not just another day in the life of this 2-year-
old, 5-year-old, or 8-year-old. This separation is something that is
causing trauma within their own minds.
Have you read the stories about the reunifications, where some of the
parents come back, finally get their children, and the children will
not even come to the parents? They don't quite understand what just
happened to them. They think the parent might have just decided to give
them up.
There they were alone and by themselves at that tender age. Can you
imagine that for your children or your grandchildren? I can't.
We did it as part of the official government policy of the Trump
administration under zero tolerance.
When some of us come to the floor to question the actions, the
conduct, the management of ICE, we have good reason to do it. I hope
for the people within that agency who are doing their jobs
conscientiously that we can at least be honest in saying that this
policy is one which doesn't deserve praise and doesn't deserve our
adoration on the floor of the Senate or the House.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.