[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 4 (Wednesday, January 9, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S77-S78]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                            BORDER SECURITY

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, last night, President Trump delivered 
his first address to the Nation from the Oval Office. In the midst of 
this partial government shutdown, the President offered a reminder of 
just what is at stake; that is, the security of our Nation's southern 
border.
  By now, on day 19 of Senate Democrats' latest experiment in 
``absentee negotiation,'' my colleagues are well-versed in the facts on 
the ground.
  We know Border Patrol agents are encountering historic levels of 
illicit substances like fentanyl and heroin at our border. We know that 
last year saw thousands of attempted border crossings by individuals 
with criminal records and literally hundreds more by known gang 
members. We understand the status quo is not enough to keep our 
families and communities safe.
  Fortunately, we know the solutions on the table--solutions which the 
President has placed at the center of the national conversation since 
the earliest days of his administration--are actually eminently 
reasonable.
  As one former Border Patrol Chief's under President Obama put it just 
recently, ``If you look in the past, you don't have to go too far back 
into history . . . bipartisan legislation passed where they built the 
wall, or fence, or physical barrier, or whatever you want to call it. 
It's a wall. It works.''
  That is what the Border Patrol Chief under President Obama said.
  He went on to say:

       It is not based on personal political ideology. That's 
     based on historical data and facts that could be proven. . . 
     . I cannot think of a legitimate argument why anyone would 
     not support the wall as part of the multi-layered border 
     security issue.

  So why are we not listening to the experts and the people who are 
doing this every day, like that Border Patrol Chief under President 
Obama?
  The experts know what they are talking about. The facts back them up. 
According to CBP, in four border sectors where this administration has 
already constructed or improved physical barriers in the last 2 years--
listen to this--illicit traffic has fallen by 90 percent--90 percent.
  Of course, not too long ago, my colleagues across the aisle had a 
completely different position on this subject. Before the political 
winds blew a different way, before this particular President was 
inaugurated, Senate Democrats did heed the advice of the men and women 
who protect our border.
  By very wide bipartisan margins, and on multiple occasions, the 
Senate has cleared literally billions of dollars in funding for 
physical barriers along the southern border.
  In 2006, then-Senator Obama said the Secure Fence Act would provide 
``badly needed funding for better fences and better security.'' That is 
what then-Senator Obama said in 2006.
  In 2009, the current Democratic leader praised as major progress 
``630 miles of border fence''--fence--``that create a significant 
barrier to illegal immigration.'' That is what the then-majority leader 
said in 2009, who is now the minority leader.
  During the last Presidential election, former Senator Clinton saw fit 
to tout the ``numerous times'' she voted to ``build a barrier to try 
and prevent illegal immigrants from coming in.'' That is what Hillary 
Clinton said. ``Numerous times,'' ``significant barrier,''

[[Page S78]]

``badly needed,'' that was where leading Democrats stood.
  Today, however, it seems there is a new party line. The use of 
physical barriers to preserve the integrity of a sovereign Nation is 
now, according to the new Speaker of the House, ``immoral''--
``immoral.'' They went from ``badly needed'' to ``immoral'' in little 
more than the span of a Presidency. Talk about a pivot. Talk about a 
pivot.
  My Democratic friends wanted fencing and physical barriers in the 
recent past. Their most prominent leaders actually bragged about voting 
for physical barriers. The only thing that has changed between then and 
now is the occupant of the White House.
  Steel fencing was fine, even salutary, when President Obama was in 
the White House, but it is ``immoral'' when President Trump occupies 
the office.
  All of a sudden--all of a sudden--Democrats have developed this new 
partisan allergy to the subject of border security. They are even 
prolonging a partial government shutdown just to avoid getting more of 
what they themselves have voted for in the past.
  This inconsistency doesn't stop with drawing imaginary lines in the 
sand between the border security the Democrats once supported and the 
virtually identical measures they have decided to oppose today. The 
inconsistency also extends to the conduct of the Senate itself during 
this tantrum.

                          ____________________