[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 121 (Monday, July 12, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4830-S4831]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTION

      By Mr. LEAHY:
  S. 2311. A bill making emergency supplemental appropriations for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 2021, and for other purposes; read the 
first time.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, over the weeks, I have been rising on the 
Senate floor to urge that the Senate take up and pass an emergency 
supplemental. So I am rising again to tell you what that emergency 
supplemental is, even though I have stated it over and over again. It 
is to deal with the fallout from the violent insurrection that took 
place at the seat of our democracy on January 6.
  I have been making this call for 2 months now. I am frustrated and 
beginning to feel a little bit like a broken record. Just days before 
this Chamber left for the July 4 recess, I sounded the alarm that time 
was running out. It is even more so today. The Senate has only a few 
weeks to act. If we do nothing, the Capitol Police will deplete 
salaries funding sometime in August. And for anybody who hasn't looked 
at the calendar, that is next month. This means that the men and women 
who protect the seat of democracy and Members of Congress and their 
staff in this building and the support staff who keep the building 
running may face furloughs and significant impacts to the department's 
programs and mission asset support, including the hiring of much needed 
new sworn officers. These are the same women and men who fought and 
bled--and some died--for everything this hallowed building stands for. 
That happened on January 6.
  We owe them more than just a paycheck. As a result of this budget 
crunch, purchases of critical equipment--like respirators, ballistic 
helmets, protective gear--and training that has all been delayed. 
Efforts to implement the department's wellness program to address 
mental health concerns that followed the January 6 insurrection have 
been put on the back burner. These police officers stood with us on 
that horrible day. Shouldn't we stand with them now and pass the 
emergency appropriations to address these shortfalls?
  And I point out that it is not only the Capitol Police that we owe. 
Our distinguished Presiding Officer served with distinction in our 
military. I think of the days after January 6, when tens and thousands 
of men and women from the National Guard from all over the country came 
to secure our Nation's Capital ahead of the inauguration and beyond. 
They were called, they came, and they appeared here. Like many other 
Senators, I thank them for their service. But unless Congress acts, the 
National Guard will be forced to cut training they need to prepare for 
overseas deployments and responses at home to make up for the costs 
incurred as a result of January 6.
  If we have, as we often do, forest fires, hurricanes, and floods that 
hit our individual States, we are going to want to call on the National 
Guard. But what we are seeing now, if we don't pass this bill, is this: 
Gee, come when we call you, and the check may be in the mail a year or 
2 or 3 years later or never at all.
  Now, we don't budget for an insurrection, but it has been 187 days 
since the violent mob stormed the very Chamber we are standing in now, 
sitting in the same Presiding Officer's chair where our distinguished 
Presiding Officer now sits. My memory of the growing roar of that mob 
echoing down the hallway as the Capitol Police whisked us to safety has 
not faded. It hasn't faded from the consciousness of the American 
people or the rest of the world.
  It has been 53 days since the House passed its own security 
supplemental, and I was shocked that not a single Republican voted for 
it. So I provided my Republican colleagues here in the Senate with a 
proposal to address these pressing needs and many others. I did that 
over a month ago, and I urged that we begin negotiations in earnest. 
Only now have they come to the table with a proposal. While I 
appreciate them bringing something, it is a pretty small something. It 
is a proposal that does not provide the appropriate resources to secure 
the Capitol or address the urgent needs that have arisen since January 
6.
  The images of the mob breaking through windows and forcing their way 
through doors exposed the truth. The Capitol and its office buildings 
are not impenetrable. It is not a fortress. The windows can be broken. 
The doors can be breached. This complex is no longer shrouded with the 
protection of belief that it is not possible to storm these Halls. Much 
like the windows, that protection was shattered, and it was broadcast 
to the whole world on January 6. See, the emperor has no clothes.
  Unfortunately, the Republican proposal would not adequately address 
our vulnerabilities.
  I have been very clear saying over and over again that I don't want 
to militarize our Capitol in the wake of January 6. It is important 
that the Capitol campus that I first saw as a teenager with my mother 
and father remain open for citizens from all walks of life to come and 
enjoy. It is their democracy after all. But we can and we must invest 
in securing the Capitol in a way that will address our vulnerabilities, 
protect Members and staff, and still keep us open to the public. I am 
confident that we can strike that balance.
  We also have a responsibility to pay for the unforeseen costs of 
investing and prosecuting these violent insurgents. The FBI, the U.S. 
Marshals, the DC Metropolitan Police Department, and numerous other law 
enforcement agencies hurried to defend the Capitol at the urgent call, 
and we are all thankful for that.
  Federal prosecutors have charged more than 500 people in more than 40 
States with participating in the attack, and arrests continue almost 
daily. We have a responsibility to support these Agencies in dealing 
with January 6 and its aftermath, but it is not addressed in the 
Republican proposal. I am tired of hearing people saying we are in 
favor of law and order and law enforcement, but we just don't want to 
pay for it.
  It should not be lost on us that we were not the ones to sweep up the 
shattered glasses, scrub the floors and walls of this building on that 
day and throughout the night. We cannot turn our backs on the dedicated 
public servants, the women and men who had to process that trauma that 
day as they boarded up shattered windows and broken doors. And it is a 
trauma that came at the end of a yearlong pandemic.
  It should not be lost on us that during the darkest hours of the 
pandemic, these are the same public servants who came to work to clean 
our offices, ensuring our safety and the safety of our staff. We have a 
responsibility to pay for these and other costs that were incurred as a 
result of the pandemic on the Capitol Complex and its staff.
  Now, of course, we did not budget for an insurrection. We don't 
budget for a global pandemic. We have been forced to rob Peter to pay 
Paul to keep our congressional community safe and healthy. The scars of 
COVID have not healed in our own Capitol community, and they have not 
been addressed in the other party's proposal.
  But we can't also ignore the world around us. We have another 
emergency brewing. This one is in Afghanistan, and we have a moral 
responsibility to address it. I have been talking for 2 years now of an 
imminent departure from Afghanistan. Now it is happening, and we must 
ensure that the brave Afghans who stood with America are not abandoned 
as we conclude our mission in that country.
  I am fortunate that there is bipartisan support for this effort. I 
think this is something where Republicans and Democrats have to come 
together. We made a promise. Whether you supported the war or not, we 
made a promise to the Afghans who risked their own lives to support and 
protect our troops and our country. We made a promise to them, and as a 
country our word should be our bond. And we all agree--I believe both 
Republicans and Democrats--that bond is not going to be broken on our 
watch. And if we don't address this now, if we don't keep our word now, 
then when?
  The bill I am introducing today includes funds to care for the 
inevitable flood of Afghan refugees to neighboring

[[Page S4831]]

countries and an increase in the number of Afghan special immigrant 
visas. They must be included in this package because the crisis is 
unfolding now.
  There is no dispute about the urgency and the importance of standing 
with our Afghan allies. My colleagues on the other side do not address 
it in their proposal. I hope they will.
  So where are we? A violent insurrection that none of us thought we 
would ever see in our lifetime happened. A pandemic that we thought we 
would never see in our lifetime happened. And the President has 
announced the withdrawal of the American troops from Afghanistan. These 
events created urgent needs that must be met.
  My Republican colleagues are proposing that we deal with these 
problems piecemeal, address some of them now and others sometime, 
somewhere, someday. But a piecemeal approach that jumps from one 
problem to the next is no way to govern. I have been here long enough 
to know that a promise to do it later is no promise at all.
  It has been 53 days since the House passed a security supplemental, 
and only now are my Republican colleagues coming to the negotiating 
table. I don't want to wait another 53 days more before we address 
these pressing matters. We can't govern by crisis, and we can't 
legislate at the convenience of either party. So I am introducing my 
comprehensive proposal today.
  To make sure it is not a surprise to anybody, I shared this proposal 
with my Republican colleagues more than a month ago--a month ago--and I 
am sharing it with the full Senate today. It addresses all the needs 
arising from the tragic events of January 6 and the global pandemic.
  This is the best way forward. We owe it to our Members in both 
parties. We owe it to our staff. We owe it to the Capitol Police. We 
owe it to the National Guard, and we owe it to numerous others. We must 
act, and we must act in a comprehensive way. We have only one shot at 
this. We have a responsibility to get it right.
  With that, Madam President, at the end of my remarks, I introduce a 
bill making emergency supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year 
ending September 30, 2021, and for other purposes. I ask to have it 
held at the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill is received
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mr. Padilla):
  S. 2313. A bill for the relief of Maria Isabel Bueso Barrera, Alberto 
Bueso Mendoza, and Karla Maria Barrera De Bueso; to the Committee on 
the Judiciary.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, today I am reintroducing a bill for 
the private relief of Maria Isabel Bueso Barrera and her parents. Ms. 
Bueso is a Guatemalan national living in Concord, California. She has a 
rare medical condition, and her removal from the United States would 
deprive her of lifesaving medical care.
  Ms. Bueso suffers from a rare, life-threatening disorder called 
Mucopolysaccharidosis Type VI (MPS-VI), a rare genetic condition caused 
by the absence of an enzyme that is needed for the growth of healthy 
bones and connective tissues. Ms. Bueso uses a wheelchair for mobility, 
has a shunt in her brain, and requires a tracheotomy to help her 
breathe.
  In 2003, Ms. Bueso and her family came to the United States at the 
invitation of doctors who were conducting a clinical trial to treat her 
condition. That trial led to Food and Drug Administration-approved 
treatment for MPS-VI. Ms. Bueso now receives this life-saving treatment 
every week at UCSF Children's Hospital in Oakland, CA, where she unoes 
a 6-hour infusion of a prescription drug that replaces the enzyme that 
people with MPS-VI lack. Ms. Bueso has participated in six other 
medical trials.
  For the past 10 years, Isabel and her family received deferred action 
from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services so that she could 
continue receiving the treatments that keep her alive. This treatment 
is not available in Guatemala.
  On August 13, 2019, USCIS notified Ms. Bueso and her family that 
their extensions of deferred action were denied, and that they would be 
deported if they did not leave the United States within 33 days.
  This decision was effectively a death sentence for Ms. Bueso. USCIS 
ultimately reconsidered its decision and granted Ms. Bueso and her 
parents an additional extension of deferred action.
  Ms. Bueso has beaten the odds because of the life-saving treatment 
that she has received in the United States. She is now 26 years old and 
a 2018 graduate of California State University, East Bay. She has 
become an outspoken advocate on behalf of people with rare diseases. 
Her family pays taxes, owns a home, and is active in their community.
  The Bueso family should be allowed to remain in California, where 
they will continue to enrich their community, and where Isabel will be 
able to receive the care that allows her to survive and thrive.
  The legislation that I am introducing today would provide a permanent 
solution for Isabel and her parents. I ask my colleagues to support 
this private bill, which makes the Bueso family eligible for issuance 
of an immigrant visa or for adjustment of status.
  I also ask unanimous consent that a copy of the bill be included in 
the Record.

                                S. 2313

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR MARIA ISABEL BUESO 
                   BARRERA, ALBERTO BUESO MENDOZA, AND KARLA MARIA 
                   BARRERA DE BUESO.

       (a) In General.--Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b) of 
     section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 
     1151), Maria Isabel Bueso Barrera, Alberto Bueso Mendoza, and 
     Karla Maria Barrera De Bueso shall each be eligible for 
     issuance of an immigrant visa or for adjustment of status to 
     that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence 
     upon filing an application for issuance of an immigrant visa 
     under section 204 of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1154) or for 
     adjustment of status to lawful permanent resident.
       (b) Adjustment of Status.--If Maria Isabel Bueso Barrera, 
     Alberto Bueso Mendoza, or Karla Maria Barrera De Bueso enters 
     the United States before the filing deadline specified in 
     subsection (c), Maria Isabel Bueso Barrera, Alberto Bueso 
     Mendoza, or Karla Maria Barrera De Bueso shall be considered 
     to have entered and remained lawfully in the United States 
     and shall be eligible for adjustment of status under section 
     245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1255) as 
     of the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (c) Application and Payment of Fees.--Subsections (a) and 
     (b) shall apply only if the applications for issuance of 
     immigrant visas or the applications for adjustment of status 
     are filed with appropriate fees not later than two years 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (d) Reduction of Immigrant Visa Numbers.--Upon the granting 
     of immigrant visas or permanent resident status to Maria 
     Isabel Bueso Barrera, Alberto Bueso Mendoza, and Karla Maria 
     Barrera De Bueso, the Secretary of State shall instruct the 
     proper officer to reduce by three, during the current or next 
     following fiscal year--
       (1) the total number of immigrant visas that are made 
     available to natives of the country of birth of Maria Isabel 
     Bueso Barrera, Alberto Bueso Mendoza, and Karla Maria Barrera 
     De Bueso under section 203(a) of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(a)); or
       (2) if applicable, the total number of immigrant visas that 
     are made available to natives of the country of birth of 
     Maria Isabel Bueso Barrera, Alberto Bueso Mendoza, and Karla 
     Maria Barrera De Bueso under section 202(e) of such Act (8 
     U.S.C. 1152(e)).
       (e) PAYGO.--The budgetary effects of this Act, for the 
     purpose of complying with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 
     2010, shall be determined by reference to the latest 
     statement titled ``Budgetary Effects of PAYGO Legislation'' 
     for this Act, submitted for printing in the Congressional 
     Record by the Chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, 
     provided that such statement has been submitted prior to the 
     vote on passage.

                          ____________________