[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 29 (Thursday, February 14, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1372-S1373]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                           Government Funding

  Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. President, I had planned to come to the floor this 
evening to talk about our national parks and to talk about the lands 
bill that just passed, but I also want to talk for a moment, if I 
could, about the legislation we just voted on on this floor. It had to 
do with border security, and it had to do with six other appropriations 
bills that include many of our Departments and Agencies. It also had to 
do with keeping the government from shutting down. If this legislation 
is now passed by the House tonight, which is expected, and is signed 
into law by the President, which is expected, we will avoid a 
government shutdown, which is really important. We don't need to go 
there again.
  I also want to talk, for a second, about the package itself and the 
most controversial part of it, which has to do with the border. I voted 
yes this evening, and I did so because the legislation we just signed 
takes really important steps towards strengthening our southern border. 
Frankly, I am not hearing much about that on either side of the aisle.
  First, let me just say that President Trump had a proposal on the 
border. His was a comprehensive proposal--yes--of more barriers and 
fencing but also of more cameras, more remote sensing, more screening 
at ports of entry, more judges, more Border Patrol, and so on.
  That legislation that he asked us to take up included $22.8 billion--
a lot of money, right?
  Now, some will say: But Congress didn't follow what President Trump 
wanted to do because they gave him less money.
  The border security funding in this package is actually about $300 
million less than the President asked for. It is $22.5 billion.
  But Congress decided--and I think Congress is right about this--that 
our southern border is in need of help right now. Some call it a 
crisis. Some just say it is a big problem. I don't care what you call 
it. We need more help on the border. We need more barriers, but we also 
need more cameras, more remote sensing, and more ways to stop the drugs 
from coming in, most of which come through the ports of entry. Yes, we 
need more people to be able to respond. Yes, we need more judges to be 
able to handle this backlog of immigration cases that has built up. 
Yes, we need more humanitarian assistance.
  By the way, the Trump administration and the Democrats from Congress 
supported both of those things. The place where there was a difference 
was the amount of funding to put into the barriers. They gave him less 
money than he asked for for new barriers and new fencing.
  The agreement includes nearly $1.4 billion for that--for the new 
barriers and new fencing. By the way, it might also surprise you to 
learn that that is the most money Congress has ever appropriated for 
fencing and new barriers in any fiscal year.
  Let me repeat that. This is the most money Congress has ever voted 
for to provide more barriers along the border. And these are new 
barriers.
  Now, again, if you listen to folks--sometimes on both sides of the 
aisle--on this issue, you might not hear that, but this is the most 
ever in any one fiscal year. By the way, we are already 4\1/2\ months 
into this fiscal year.
  I am glad we provided the funding because I think it is needed. I 
believe we do have a crisis on the border. I believe it has to do with 
illegal immigration, but also it has to do with drugs that are 
devastating my home State of Ohio.
  Crystal meth is on the rise--pure crystal meth from Mexico, almost 
all of it. Ninety percent of the heroin coming into my State comes 
across that southern border.
  We now have fentanyl coming in from across the border in addition to 
coming straight from China. We now have, of course, cocaine coming 
across the southern border. We have serious drug problems that need to 
be addressed.
  I have done a lot of work on the issue of human trafficking, and I 
can just tell you that what we have learned, sadly, is that the amount 
of trafficking going on along the southern border increases as you have 
more and more people who are trafficking human beings for work--illegal 
immigration, which I think is mostly for people coming here to find a 
better life for work, but they are bringing with them a lot of people 
who are trafficking women and children.
  So the trafficking issue is real. That is what the experts tell us, 
and that is another reason for us to have a more secure southern 
border. So I am glad that we are providing the funding.
  With regard to the new barriers, what the President had asked for is 
that his funding go to fund the top priorities of the Border Patrol. 
Customs and Border Protection has a border security improvement plan. 
You can check it out online. The border security improvement plan has a 
number of priorities. The President wanted to fund those priorities. 
This proposal that we voted on tonight does fund about 55 miles of new 
barriers--not just fixing up old barriers, but new barriers--which 
comprise the top two priorities of that border security plan.
  Would the President like to do more in terms of barriers? Yes, he 
would, and he is talking about ways to do that.
  But my point tonight is very simple. If you really care about the 
southern border, then, this was the right vote to take because, with 
regard to barriers, this is the most Congress has ever provided for new 
barriers, new fencing.
  I hope this will work to help stop this flow of drugs into our 
country, to help control the illegal immigration that is happening, to 
help stop the trafficking of women and children that goes on along the 
border, but it is going to require more work. We all know that. This is 
a start, and my hope is that by passing this legislation we can help to 
start those even more serious efforts to deal with our broader issues 
here, including our broader immigration issues that have to be dealt 
with.
  So I am hopeful that the House will pass it. I am hopeful that the 
President will sign it. I think he will. He says he will.
  I am also glad that we are not going into a shutdown. Shutdowns make 
no sense. We have legislation, as some of you know, to try to stop 
government shutdowns from happening in the future. Why? Because they 
are bad for taxpayers, who end up paying more, not less, often because 
workers who are furloughed actually get paid even when they are not 
working, but also because of the inefficiencies of government during a 
shutdown. Taxpayer services are reduced--everything from meat 
inspection to the security lines, to the IRS information line to figure 
out how to file your doggone taxes. I mean, all of that gets affected.
  So shutdowns don't make sense. It really doesn't make sense for the 
men and women who work for the Federal Government and for their 
families. During this last shutdown of 35 days, workers who were told 
they were essential, therefore, had to report for work, and they were 
not getting paid. So, again, those who weren't working got paid after 
the fact, and those who were working were not getting paid during the 
shutdown. That doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
  By the way, missing two pay periods is a big deal for a lot of the 
government workers I know because they live paycheck to paycheck. They 
had rent payments. They had house payments, in some cases. They had car 
payments. They had real issues getting through this. Let's not put them 
through it again. It is not their fault. They shouldn't be pawns in 
this.
  So my hope is that we can pass the ``end government shutdown'' 
legislation. It has 33 cosponsors now, which is a lot for around here, 
and it gets you started. A third of the Senate has said: Yes, let's 
stop these things. That is a big deal. My hope is that on both sides of 
the aisle our leadership agrees to take this to the floor. Let's have a 
vote on it. Let's decide whether people think shutdowns are a good idea 
or not. I think they are a bad idea.
  By the way, it is the fifth Congress in which I have introduced this 
legislation, and I must say that we have never had this many 
cosponsors. So I do think more and more people are realizing that this 
is just not the way we

[[Page S1373]]

ought to operate. It is no way to run a railroad or a government.