[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 84 (Wednesday, May 15, 2024)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3734-S3739]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
BORDER ACT
Mr. MURPHY. Madam President, it has been 98 days--almost 100 days--
since Senate Republicans killed the toughest border security bill, the
toughest bipartisan border security bill that has been before the
Senate in nearly a generation.
We are proud that our Nation is a nation with a robust history of
immigration. We know that our future involves inviting people to come
to this country to seek a better life, to be part of our growing
economy, to start their own businesses, and to flee violence or terror
or torture. We are proud of our history of immigration. We know that
America only thrives in the future by committing ourselves to a future
of robust immigration.
But what has been happening at the border over the past several years
is unsustainable. We want people to come to this country, but we cannot
handle 5-, 6-, 7-, 8-, 9-, 10,000 people arriving on a daily basis.
Our system of legal immigration is broken. People come to the United
States; they apply for asylum; and they often don't get their chance to
make their case for 10 years. That is not fair to those individuals,
but it is also not fair to others who have been waiting outside of the
United States to apply to come here.
Our immigration system is outdated. It is in need of reform. Our
border is underresourced, with statutes that are equally outdated.
Right now, there is only one party--the Democratic Party--that is
serious about adding resources to the border, about updating our
outdated laws because it has been 98 days since a bipartisan border
security bill--negotiated by Senate Republicans, including Senate
Republican leadership, and Senate Democrats--came to this floor and was
defeated because Republicans would not vote for it.
Republicans would not vote for the bipartisan border security bill
not because it was an ineffective bill--in fact, it is quite the
opposite. Senate Republicans defeated the bill because it would be
effective.
Now, that doesn't make sense, right? Why would that be? Why would
Senate Republicans vote against a bipartisan border security bill that
would have been effective at bringing order to the southwest border?
The reason is this: Republicans have decided that they don't want to
solve the problem at the border. Republicans have decided that they
want this issue to be outstanding. They want the border to be chaotic.
They want the border to be a mess because it helps their political
purposes. It helps win an election. If the border was under control, if
there were less people presented, if it was more orderly, that would be
good for the country, but that might not be good for electoral
prospects.
Therein lies the reason that we have not had action on the bipartisan
border bill--because Democrats want to get something done; Republicans
want to keep this issue open. They want to keep the border a mess for
political purposes.
You don't have to listen to me. Senator McConnell said it out loud.
Senator Lankford said it out loud. The reason that this bill was
defeated 98 days ago was because Donald Trump told Republicans that it
is better for Republicans to keep this issue alive and to not change
the law to secure the country.
Tomorrow, I am going to reintroduce the bipartisan border bill. My
hope is that we will bring that bill to the floor for a vote to give my
Republican colleagues another chance to do the right thing, another
chance to choose the safety and security of this country over the
political prospects of their candidate for President.
Americans want us to come together to pass border and immigration
reform. They support compromise between the two parties. That is
exactly what the bipartisan border bill represented.
Senator Lankford and I do not share views on the border. Senator
McConnell and Senator Schumer do not share views on the border. But we
all sat in a room for 4\1/2\ months, along with Senator Sinema, in
order to find a compromise that would better secure our border and
create a more humane, more efficient mechanism to bring people into
this country legally.
Let me just briefly talk about what this bill does. This will make
sense to Americans when you hear it. There is nothing radical in this
bill. These are commonsense changes to our laws.
First, it gives the President new authority to better control the
border. Listen, we can't handle 10,000 people crossing a day. So what
this bill does is it says that at periods of time when there are
unusually high numbers of people crossing the southwest border, the
President can close portions of the border, stop accepting asylum
applications until the numbers are reduced to the point where our
resources at the border meet the number of people who are arriving.
This is a bold new power, a bold new authority for President Biden,
but it is necessary because there are simply some times, some days,
some weeks when the numbers are too high.
The second thing this bill does is significantly reform our asylum
application system. As I mentioned, you come to the southwest border;
you present an application for asylum; and we are so backed up in that
system that it often takes people 5 to 10 years before their claim is
heard. That is not right for that individual or for the country at
large. So this bill shortens that timeframe with new laws and new
resources so that instead of it taking 10 years for a migrant to have
their asylum claim heard, it could now take 10 days or a few months.
That is the right thing to do.
But it also has the effect of dramatically changing the calculus for
people who are thinking about paying a trafficker $5,000, $10,000 to
come to the United States. If they know that they have an illegitimate
claim and it is
[[Page S3735]]
going to be judged as illegitimate within weeks, they won't pay the
$5,000 to come to the United States. Today, they might be willing to
pay it because even if they have an illegitimate claim, they may get to
stay in the United States for 5 or 10 years. This fundamentally changes
the calculus and decreases the amount of risk that people are willing
to take.
This bill also understands that we should have more legal pathways to
come to the United States, and when people come to the United States
and are waiting to have their claims heard, they shouldn't be living in
the shadows. So this bill also increases the number of work and family
visas by 250,000 over the course of 5 years to allow more legal,
planned pathways for people to come to the United States.
The bill also allows for individuals who arrive at the border to get
immediate work authorizations in most cases so that while their
application is pending, they can work so that you don't have a
situation we have today, where people are being warehoused in homeless
shelters and in hotels without the ability to work while they are
waiting for their claim to be processed.
And this bill does create some pathways for individuals who are here
today to become citizens. In particular, our Afghan partners who fought
with us, who stood with us in Afghanistan, under this bill, get the
opportunity to become American citizens. And the children of high-tech
workers who are here on temporary visas who might have been born
outside of the United States but were raised here in the United States,
they get a chance to stay here as well.
That is just a handful of the changes in the bill that enhance
protections and benefits for individuals who are awaiting for the
determination of their claim to be processed.
But the combination of these changes--the new authorities at the
border, the emergency authority, the new asylum system, combined with
some new protections for individuals who are coming to the United
States--it represents a true compromise between Republicans and
Democrats, between right and left. It is exactly what the American
people want.
My hope is that our Republican colleagues have had the chance to
rethink their vote from several months ago. My hope is that Republicans
will decide to do the right thing for the country, the right thing for
the border.
We negotiated this bill at the request of Republicans. The chief
Republican negotiator, Senator Lankford, was chosen by the Republican
conference. Senator McConnell and his staff were in the room for all of
those negotiations. The Republicans voted against it--with the
exception of four of our colleagues--for one reason and one reason
only: President Trump said it would be better for Republicans to keep
this issue open, to keep the border a mess, better for Republican
Presidential and congressional campaign prospects.
So, tomorrow, I will reintroduce this legislation. I don't expect it
will get every single Democratic vote because it is a true compromise,
but I expect it will get enough Democratic votes that if half of the
Senate Republican caucus votes for it, it will pass, and we will be a
step closer to doing what America wants: continuing our tradition of
robust legal immigration, building upon our tradition as a country
founded upon immigration but doing it in a legal way and creating a
much more orderly system at the border. That is what America wants:
Keep our system of legal immigration; get the border under control. The
bipartisan border bill does both of those things, and my hope is that
we can come together and Republicans will choose this country and
border security over the political prospects of their Presidential
candidate, Donald Trump.
I am glad to be joined on the floor by a number of my Democratic
colleagues today to talk about the importance of this measure, the
chance the Senate has to act in a bipartisan way on border security.
With that, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, I thank my colleagues. I will be brief.
I want to thank my friend Senator Murphy for bringing us to the floor
this evening to talk about the need to fix our southern border with
bipartisan--bipartisan--action.
Senator Murphy did outstanding work earlier this year, along with
Senators Sinema and Lankford and others, by doing what many thought
impossible: producing a real, necessary, and bipartisan border bill.
When our bill was first released, a lot of our Republican colleagues
were surprised with how strong it was. But then, as we all know, Donald
Trump came barging in and told his MAGA supporters to kill the bill.
Democrats have not walked away from this issue. We believe, if you
are going to call something an emergency, then we cannot wait to act.
We hope, despite Republicans' opposition a few months ago, that our
colleagues are willing to join us to secure the border, as they said
they wanted to do. After all, how many times have we heard from our
Republican colleagues through speeches, press conferences, letters that
fixing the border cannot wait? They said it cannot wait. Well, we don't
want to wait any longer.
Just listen to the words from the other side going back years about
the need to act.
This crisis requires swift, serious, and substantive
action.
That was what my colleague from Wyoming said recently.
How about this:
[T]he time to act on it is yesterday.
That is what Speaker Mike Johnson said, standing at the border at
the beginning of this year.
How about the words of Donald Trump:
Tonight, I am asking you to defend our very dangerous
southern border out of love and devotion to our fellow
citizens and to our country.
That is what Donald Trump said in his 2019 State of the Union
Address.
And, you know what, Democrats agree Congress should act. We believe
the status quo cannot continue. But here is the thing: The only real,
long-term solution to the southern border is bipartisan legislation.
That is the only way you get things done around here--bipartisan--
bipartisan legislation like the bill we had here in the Senate 3 months
ago, bipartisan legislation like the one we wrote to hire thousands
more border agents and thousands more asylum officers and invest
billions to stop the flow of fentanyl and other drugs.
The conservative Wall Street Journal editorial board--hardly a friend
of this side of the aisle--here is what they said:
A Border . . . Bill Worth Passing.
The head of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce called it ``a commonsense
measure.''
Maybe most importantly, the president of the National Border Patrol
Council--a union, extremely conservative, very close with President
Trump--called it ``far better than the status quo.''
I ask my Republican colleagues: If a border security bill was good
enough to win the support of actual border agents, shouldn't it have
been good enough to win the support of the Republican Senate?
If we want to fix asylum and stop fentanyl and hire more agents,
shouldn't we pass a bill that actually fixes asylum, stops fentanyl,
and hires more agents? That is precisely what our border bill would
have done. That is precisely why we made such a strong push to pass it
in the Senate 3 months ago. And that is precisely the bill that Donald
Trump killed in a vain attempt to gain an edge on the campaign trail.
He was clear about what he did. He said, ``Please, blame it on me,'' as
if it were all a game to Donald Trump.
I am used to Donald Trump saying it. Speaker Pelosi and I were at the
White House when he was thinking about shutting down the government,
and he said: Blame it on me. It didn't work out so well for him. It is
not going to work out so well for him this time either.
The American people do not have the luxury of playing partisan blame
games. They want bipartisan action to secure our border. Democrats
stand ready to work with Republicans to pass bipartisan border
security. We hope our Republican colleagues stand ready to take action
too.
Madam President, I want to thank my colleagues for being here.
Democrats are going to continue to pursue this issue. We believe the
public agrees with us.
[[Page S3736]]
Passing a bipartisan bill is a lot better than making a lot of
speeches, doing a lot of finger-pointing, and getting nothing done on
the border.
I again thank my colleagues. I thank Senator Murphy for his great
leadership. We have a number of our colleagues here tonight. I thank
them for coming. It shows the importance we give to this issue.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
Mr. KELLY. Madam President, as my colleague from Connecticut said, it
has been nearly 100 days since my Republican colleagues walked away
from a bipartisan border security agreement. That is nearly 100 days
that my State of Arizona and other border States have had to live with
the consequences of that failure.
We could have been on our way to hiring more than 1,000 additional
Border Patrol agents and paying them better. We could have new
technology to detect fentanyl and more personnel to seize those drugs,
keeping them from getting into our communities and killing people. We
could have new authorities to prevent the border from being
overwhelmed--authorities that the President committed to using. That
includes an updated asylum system with more officers to quickly screen
claims. All of these things are things that my Republican colleagues
have wanted for years. Arizona, today, has none of it, and I think the
Presiding Officer knows why.
The Federal Government has failed Arizona on the border for decades.
Sadly, it is almost expected at this point. But no past failure is as
baffling and as cynical as this one because for once we all agreed that
the business-as-usual approach wasn't working; that our immigration
process and infrastructure can't handle the new realities at the
border--because for once there was a real plan, worked on and agreed to
by Republicans and Democrats, ready to be signed into law by the
President.
We had an opportunity to defy the low expectations that the American
people have for Congress and actually do something in a bipartisan way
to start fixing the border, but that is not what happened. Senate
Republicans walked away. Well, actually, they ran away from this
agreement because too many politicians would just prefer to keep
talking about a problem than actually solve it.
This failure isn't theoretical in my State. Over the past 3 months,
the Tucson Sector has remained the busiest for illegal crossings in the
country. Our communities and nonprofits have been stretched to the
breaking point to prevent mass releases of migrants onto the streets.
Border Patrol and local law enforcement--they are strained. So are
ports of entry, where long wait times impact families and businesses.
Did I mention that we could have had 1,000 more Border Patrol
agents--1,000?
It is a difficult situation that would be more manageable if the
Senate had done its job 3 months ago. That is not just me saying this.
That is what you will hear from anyone who lives or works on the
border, including the Border Patrol union. It is what I assume my
colleagues are hearing from mayors and law enforcement when they do
their factfinding missions, tours, and field hearings on the border.
So why don't we just listen to the folks who are most affected by the
crisis at the border and actually do something about it. Let's pass
this bipartisan border agreement. The only thing that has changed from
3 months ago is that we have wasted more time. The problem still
exists. The solutions are the same ones we negotiated together.
If you aren't convinced by every piece of it, let's debate it. If you
think it needs something added or taken away, let's vote on amendments.
We just need some--some--of our Republican colleagues to join us, and
we can open up the debate on this legislation. Think about it. We can
be the Senate that finally breaks through the gridlock and does
something meaningful on the border.
Madam President, let's defy those low expectations the American
people have for us. That is what they deserve from us.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.
Ms. STABENOW. Madam President, what a wonderful thought the Senator
from Arizona said: Defy expectations, and actually get something done.
You know, we have attempted so many times to do immigration reform
and border security reform, and somehow it has always gotten stuck,
unfortunately, over politics.
And this is the moment. I was so excited when Senator Murphy and
Senator Sinema and Senator Lankford came together and everyone was
focused on actually negotiating a strong, bipartisan bill.
Unfortunately, because of politics again, it has not yet happened.
On April 2, Donald Trump came to Grand Rapids, MI, lamenting what is
happening at the border and using the tragic death of a young woman,
who was a domestic violence victim, to politicize what has happened.
While he lied and said he met with the woman's family--and the family
indicated he did not--he was more willing to exploit her death for his
own politics than to support the passage of our strong, bipartisan
border bill.
As we know, Republicans like to portray themselves as being the party
of national security. If you want your family to be safe, then
Republicans say you should vote for Republicans. Well, 98 days ago,
they had a chance to boost our national security by voting for a strong
border security bill written by Republicans and Democrats together, and
98 days ago, they killed the bill. And we all know why.
Unfortunately and, honestly, amazingly to me, after all that
incredible work to get this done, they end up voting no. They killed
the bill because Donald Trump told them to. As he was calling around,
he shockingly said just tell them--``Please, blame it on me.'' Well, in
fact, we are blaming it on him at his request because he is the one who
stepped in because of politics and said: No, I don't want to solve
this. I don't want to solve this. I want chaos at the border. I don't
want to solve this. This will help the President or will help somebody
else other than him. And he convinced Republicans to vote no.
Madam President, Democrats want to address the challenges at the
border. We know they are real. We know they are serious. We want to do
the things that will make a difference. We want to give the Biden
administration additional tools to solve them. And that is exactly what
this legislation does.
I want to, again, say this was legislation--strongly bipartisan--
negotiated by Senator Murphy and Senator Lankford and Senator Sinema
and a group of our colleagues coming together on both sides of the
aisle in good faith for months--months--of work. And it is clear that
this legislation would significantly improve our Nation's security in a
number of important ways.
It would fix the broken asylum system we keep hearing about. It needs
to be fixed. It would stop the flow of deadly fentanyl. And as I know
the Presiding Officer knows, this is serious. It is not just at the
southern border. It is in New Hampshire; it is in Michigan; it is
across the country. This bill is an effective tool providing resources
and technology to protect our kids, to protect people from fentanyl
overdoses.
It gives the President tools to manage the border. It invests in
border agents and security. The border security unions, Border Patrol
unions, said: Yes, this will make a difference. Please support this
bill. And this union supported former President Trump, but they said:
We want to fix the border. We support this bill.
It is incredibly important that the tools be put in place for the
President and the resources be put in place to address the issues. It
is also important to know that this importantly expands legal pathways
to citizenship and increases access to work authorizations. And those
immigrants who serve in our military would gain quicker access to
citizenship, something I think we can all agree that they have earned.
It is important that this get done.
I would just emphasize again, it is not just about the southern
border. As a northern border State in Michigan, this bill would provide
up to $100 million in grants to my State, to northern States, to local
and Tribal law enforcement Agencies to secure our country's northern
border.
And there is so much more in here that solves a series of problems
while treating people with dignity and creating opportunity. We stand
ready to
[[Page S3737]]
pass this legislation. We are committed to border security. This is no
joke. This is something that we all should come together about. And we
want to keep our communities safe. That is what this monthslong process
was all about--the serious negotiations, people working hard to come
together on really tough issues. And they did. We did.
And just before we were going to vote--just before we were going to
vote--Donald Trump appeared and said: Wait, stop, stop. You are not
seriously going to solve this, are you? No, no, no. I want the pictures
of chaos at the border. I don't want you actually governing and solving
the problem. I don't want people coming together, Republicans and
Democrats, and actually getting something done.
But that is what we were poised to do. And 98 days ago--98 days ago--
Republican colleagues killed the toughest border security bill in
decades. We are not done. We are not giving up. We are not giving up.
This is so important. We are not giving up. Our message is: It is time
to stop the politics. It is time to put the earplugs on when it comes
to Donald Trump and focus on what really needs to get done, what is the
right thing to do. It is time to fix the problems at the border. And we
remain ready, willing, and able to get this done.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.
Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Madam President, I am honored to follow my colleagues
who have spoken so powerfully on this issue and grateful to my
colleague from Connecticut for his leadership, as well to Leader
Schumer.
We are a Nation of immigrants, proudly and gratefully. Immigrants
have made this Nation the greatest in the world, and yet we have a
broken immigration system.
Fortunately for our Nation, people want to come here. Every week, I
try to go to the immigration and naturalization ceremonies in my State
of Connecticut. They are held in the courthouses. And I tell new
citizens on those occasions that they are to be thanked for wanting to
become United States citizens. They will never take it for granted.
They pass the test that most Americans couldn't pass, and they smile or
laugh because they know it is true. They have already contributed to
their communities. Some have served in uniform.
I look at them, and I say: This is what America looks like. This is
what my dad looked like in 1935 when he came to this country speaking
no English, knowing no one, having not much more than the shirt on his
back.
My immigrant story is not unlike many in this Chamber--certainly in
this Nation. And this broken immigration system is unworthy of our
great Nation. We need to fix it. We tried with comprehensive
immigration reform in 2013. I was part of that effort and helped to
write the bill that was passed overwhelmingly in the U.S. Senate on a
bipartisan basis with support on both sides of the aisle and never was
given a vote in the House.
We can do bipartisan immigration reform. And we know how to do it. In
fact, Democrats and Republicans came together about 100 days ago and
arrived at some solutions that put us on a path to fixing our broken
border. It is not the 2013 bill because it is not comprehensive. That
bill provided a path to earn citizenship for undocumented people in
this country--millions of them. It provided a path for Dreamers. It
provided for border security--literally, tens of millions of dollars--
and for more visas.
The bill that was negotiated 100 days ago and that should have passed
100 days ago would have begun the painstaking, laborious, difficult,
complex task of immigration reform. We often hear Republicans talk
about the need to secure the border. At almost every Judiciary
Committee meeting that I attend, Republicans talk about the border. And
they want to talk about the border so much that they actually sent us
contrived Articles of Impeachment against a Cabinet Secretary for the
first time in 150 years, knowing that it would go nowhere.
They are making border security a political weapon. Really, it is a
political stunt. And that is why they refused to vote for the
negotiated compromise that will be before us beginning tomorrow again
and next week.
The conversation on the floor tonight is a prelude to the battle that
we will have again tomorrow and, I hope, next week when we will all be
given a chance to go on record. All we are asking of our Republican
colleagues is that they put their votes where their mouths are.
America is angry--and America should be angry--about the lack of
border security and about the lack of serious purpose on the part of my
Republican colleagues and on their failing to do their job simply
because of the political directive of one Donald Trump. It is another
example of how the cult of Donald Trump has infected our political
process to the grave damage and detriment of all America.
Democrats spent months negotiating with Republicans and developed
that compromised border bill, the strongest bill in a generation,
endorsed by the National Border Patrol Council, and the union of Border
Patrol agents. And it would have reformed our asylum system, as you
have heard, and empowered the President to help manage challenges at
the border. But it also would have expanded work opportunities and some
legal pathways to enter the United States, including Afghan nationals
who assisted our Armed Forces and our diplomats, stood by them at grave
risk to themselves. It was a tough compromise. And it limited asylum
claims in ways that many Democrats and I were wary of, because it was a
compromise.
As soon as the bill was released and after it was agreed to by
Republicans' chosen negotiator, the Republicans torpedoed it. And they
torpedoed it for one reason: Because they wanted it as a political
issue. They killed the bill because Donald Trump demanded it. As we
have heard tonight, Donald Trump said: ``Please, blame it on me.'' And
we are here tonight to do it, because the blame is well-deserved.
So Trump and his allies have repeatedly shown that they prefer talk
over action, that they prefer political gamesmanship over the hard work
of bipartisanship on this issue. But we are not giving up. We are not
going away. We are not abandoning this effort. It will continue to be
our work, my life's work as the son of an immigrant, dedicated to
sensible and responsible immigration reform--comprehensive reform.
This bill is not the last word, but it is a start. And we will pursue
bipartisan action over political gamesmanship. Republicans need to
decide if they want to take action or just continue to talk.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Madam President, I want to join the Senator from
Connecticut in thanking Senator Murphy for his leadership, not only in
bringing this group together today but also of this very important bill
and effort to take on the issues on the border.
As we face global and domestic threats, including a surge at the
border, securing our borders and points of entry could not be more
important. We had this opportunity to move forward in a bipartisan
manner on a broad reform bill that Senators Murphy, Lankford, and
Sinema spent months negotiating. For those of us who had bills that
were part of that effort, including the Afghan Adjustment Act, I saw
firsthand the detailed work they did, the work that they did--that hard
work of coming together for what is best for our country.
We have seen these efforts before with immigration every time we have
gotten so close. When I first got to the Senate, Senator Graham and
Senator Kennedy invited me to be in the group that negotiated
legislation supported by President Bush.
We came so close to getting that done in comprehensive reform which,
of course, included funding for order at the border.
After that failed, we moved into President Obama's time. Again, this
time, it was the Senate Judiciary Committee, on which I served, that
came together with Senator Grassley's support and Senator Leahy's, and
reached an agreement, passed it through the Senate, and then it failed
over in the House of Representatives.
Time three was when Senator Rounds, Senator Kaine, and many of us
came together. I remember Senator Collins' office was the place of the
meeting. I believe the Presiding Officer
[[Page S3738]]
was part of that, too, and we reached an agreement. We had enough
votes. And then, unfortunately, President Trump gut punched the people
in his own party and came out against the bill--again, significant
funding for order at the border, significant work that would have been
done to allow people to seek citizenship who had been here for years,
many of whom know no other country, like the Dreamers.
This bill that was negotiated came with incredible headwinds that
they were up against. It would have fixed the asylum system. It would
have given the President emergency powers to shut the border down when
needed. It also would have invested in hiring more Border Patrol agents
and immigration judges, while giving law enforcement the tools and
technology they need to secure our borders.
As the Presiding Officer knows, strengthening our border security
means investing in both our southern and our northern borders, and I
note that Senator Stabenow of Michigan also touched on this very
important issue.
America shares the longest border in the world with the country of
Canada. It stretches over 5,500 miles, and more than 400,000 people and
$2 billion in goods and services cross it every day. A strong northern
border is critical for maintaining our trade relationships with Canada
and the world.
As I like to say, in Minnesota, we can see Canada from our porch, and
they are our closest trading partner. I just met with a number of
leaders from the Canadian Parliament today. But that border is also
critical for our national security.
We know that more people on the Terrorist Screening Database attempt
to enter the United States from Canada than through Mexico, and we have
witnessed terrible instances of drug smuggling and human trafficking
across this border.
Like so many others, I was horrified and heartbroken when a family of
four froze to death in a blizzard at the Minnesota-Canada border, just
2 years ago, in an incident related to human smuggling. That is why we
must ensure that Federal, State, and local officials have the
information and resources they need to protect our northern border.
And when there are issues at the southern border, they often rely on
Customs, as the Presiding Officer knows, and others to come down from
northern border offices, and that creates its own set of issues.
That is why these negotiations that Senators Murphy and Lankford and
Senator Sinema, with strong support from Senator Schumer, engaged in
and this product of a bill were so important, and that is why I
supported it.
Beyond addressing the situations at both the northern and southern
border, the Border Act would expand legal pathways by including 250,000
new family and employment visas over the next 5 years. These visas
would go a long way toward filling worker shortages in my State--and I
know in the Presiding Officer's State--that are impacting businesses in
my home State, impacting farmers, hospitality, hospitals, clinics, and
the like.
This bill also included the Afghan Adjustment Act, with some changes
that had been suggested by a number of Republican Senators, which we
included. That bill would have been a savior. There are 80,000 Afghans
here, so many of whom helped our troops--a major priority for the
American Legion, a major priority for the VFW--and they now have a
trapdoor under them. They don't know whenever they could be sent back
to the Taliban. Yet these are people we made a covenant to. And just
like after the Vietnam war, we kept that covenant--we kept that
covenant with those that stood with us--we must keep that covenant
again.
That is why Senators like Senator Graham was the lead sponsor of that
bill with me, along with Senator Moran, the ranking member of Veterans'
Affairs. Senator Risch is on the bill from Foreign Relations. We have
support from Senator Mullin on that bill. Senator Wicker is on that
bill. It is an incredible group of Republican and Democratic
cosponsors, and I thank Senator Murphy, Senator Lankford, and Senator
Sinema for their work to incorporate it into the bill. It is strongly
supported by the Chamber of Commerce as well.
So the bill not only included the work that I just mentioned on the
border and on some of these other very important issues; the bill also
would have made a major effort in taking on fentanyl by strengthening
our borders.
We did make progress on border security legislation that was signed
into law last month as part of the national security package, the FEND
Off Fentanyl Act. This critical legislation, championed by our
colleagues Senators Sherrod Brown and Tim Scott, declares fentanyl
trafficking a national emergency and imposes tough new sanctions on
fentanyl traffickers, from the chemical suppliers in China to the
Mexican cartels that traffic the drugs into our country.
We also recently provided funding for Customs and Border Protection
to detect and seize fentanyl and other narcotics at our ports of entry.
These are important steps in the right direction, but there is so
much more to do. Law enforcement officers across my State and our
country must be very concerned about this every day. One seizure,
actually, of fentanyl was enough to kill every single person in
Hennepin County, our most populous county.
In Minnesota alone, fentanyl is involved in 92 percent of opioid
deaths. Just last month, police in my husband's hometown of Mankato
arrested six suspected drug dealers and seized almost 6,000 pills laced
with fentanyl. And earlier this year, Minnesota's U.S. attorney, Andy
Luger, announced that law enforcement busted a Twin Cities drug ring
and seized over 30,000 grams of fentanyl pills. That is enough to kill
everyone in our State with over 5 million people more than two times
over.
These aren't just numbers. Each of those pills could kill one of our
friends and neighbors, mothers and fathers, sons and daughters.
I am thinking about Devin Norring from Hastings, MN. Devin was
struggling with dental pain and migraines. So he bought what he thought
was Percocet over Snapchat to deal with the pain. But it wasn't really
Percocet. It was laced with fentanyl, and it immediately killed him. He
was only 19. One pill can kill, and every pill we keep out of our
country represents a potential life saved.
That is why we have to pass this legislation. But I join my
colleagues and will continue to advocate for the bipartisan Border Act.
Why? More funding for cutting-edge technology to intercept fentanyl,
more secured border, more order at the border. We need this at the
southern border, as well as the northern border.
Next week, I hope we will have an opportunity to take action on this
bill. We have worked on this bill for months, making changes from
multiple Senators from both parties. At this point, there shouldn't be
any controversy about what is in the bill. People have had plenty of
time to read it. They have had plenty of time to see the support from
groups like the conservative union of the border agents at the border.
They have had plenty of time to see the support that the bill has from
so many groups across the country.
They have had plenty of time to hear about the horror stories, like
the one I just mentioned on fentanyl, and they have had plenty of time
to get to the place: That is enough about politics, enough about finger
pointing. Let us pass this bipartisan border bill to make our country
safer.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.
Mr. MURPHY. Madam President, let me thank my colleagues for coming to
the floor tonight to reinforce the opportunity that we have. I think we
have gotten used to immigration being a perpetual political football in
this country. It almost feels and seems unsolvable--that it is just the
subject for campaign ads, for cable news shows, for fundraising emails.
It doesn't have to be that way. We could choose to make progress. We
could choose to pass legislation that treats migrants a little bit more
humanely, that gives a pathway for individuals like those Afghan
partners to be able to become U.S. citizens and gives the President
updated powers at the border to make sure that we are doing immigration
at the southwest border in a humane, orderly way.
That is not impossible. In fact, it is more possible than ever before
because
[[Page S3739]]
a group of Senators sat in a room for 4 months, in good faith, and
hashed out a compromise that involves a lot of Republican priorities, a
lot of Democratic priorities; that is endorsed by the progressive-
leaning immigration lawyers group and the conservative-leaning Border
Patrol union; that is endorsed by the Washington Post and the Wall
Street Journal.
I know we are not used to finding common ground on immigration. It
seems to happen only once a decade. But we found it. We found it. And I
am going to be reintroducing this bill because I believe that there is
a chance Republicans will choose to do the right thing.
I get it. The border being a mess is good politics for Republicans. I
get it. Keeping this problem unsolved might provide an advantage for
Republicans in this next election. But we don't go into this business
to win elections, to just put our name on the door.
Senator Lankford said it on this floor. He said every one of us is
given a pen. Every one of us has a unique ability to make law, to make
the country better. What is the point, Senator Lankford said, of having
this job if you are just going to do press conferences, if you are not
going to actually engage in the hard work of compromise to make this
country better and safer? That is what we did.
Senator Lankford, Senator Sinema, myself, Senator Schumer, Senator
McConnell--we sat in a room for 4\1/2\ months. We forged a compromise
that unquestionably--unquestionably--will bring order to the southwest
border. And, because of that, Donald Trump is telling Republicans:
Ditch it. Vote no. We don't want there to be order at the southwest
border because that would be bad politics for us.
What is the point of having this job if you aren't willing to make
tough compromises that make this country better?
And so I understand there may be long odds to convincing Republicans
to change their vote. I understand that, because the bill is a
compromise, there will be some Democrats who will vote against it.
But I think this is so important. I take Republicans at their word
that it is an emergency to make sense of what is happening at the
border, that it is worth it to bring this bill back before the floor. I
hope our leadership will decide to schedule a vote on this bill.
I will introduce the bill imminently, I think, with many of my
colleagues supporting it. And I am deeply grateful to many of my
friends in the Democratic caucus for underscoring the importance of
bringing order to the southwest border, investing in border security,
and supporting our migrant communities, as the bipartisan border
security bill does.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
Ms. KLOBUCHAR. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________