[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 89 (Wednesday, May 22, 2024)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3830-S3836]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                           Border Act of 2024

  Mr. MURPHY. Madam President, nearly every day, Republicans come to 
this floor to tell us how much they care about the border and how much 
they believe in border security. Yet--and yet--when they have an 
opportunity to do something about it, they don't just balk; they run 
for the hills.
  If you care about securing the border, then you actually have to pass 
legislation that secures the border. It doesn't secure itself by 
itself. Our statutes are outdated. Our Border Patrol doesn't have 
enough resources. You have to change the law. You have to put more 
resources on the border. That is what the bipartisan border security 
bill did. I regret the fact that all but four Republicans voted against 
it after they requested that we engage in a bipartisan process to 
develop that border security bill, after they demanded that we pass 
bipartisan border security legislation.
  But because we believe that this issue is so important--because the 
American people believe that securing our border and compassionately 
treating those who arrive at our border is such an important issue--we 
are going to bring this bill back for another vote tomorrow. We are 
going to give Republicans a second chance to do what they say they want 
to do: work across the aisle in a bipartisan way to provide more 
resources to control our southwest border.
  So I am glad to be on the floor today with a number of my colleagues 
who believe as I do; that this is the time to pass significant 
bipartisan legislation to secure our border, to reform our broken 
immigration system. It is what the American people want.
  We should stop playing political games. Republicans should choose the 
security of this country ahead of their Presidential candidate's 
political prospects, and we have the opportunity to do that this week. 
So I am grateful to have so many of my colleagues on the floor.
  I believe starting our remarks will be Senator Kaine.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
  Mr. KAINE. Madam President, I am thrilled to join my colleagues on 
the floor to talk about the importance of this border security bill, 
but I am also going to talk about my own naivete and admit to being a 
very naive Senator.
  When I came to the Senate in 2013 with Senator Murphy, one of the 
first things we did in June of my first year in the Senate was to pass 
a significant and bipartisan immigration reform bill. That immigration 
reform bill was comprehensive, including a $40 billion-plus investment 
in border security. We passed it in a bipartisan way in this body with 
nearly 70 votes.
  My naivety was this: Yes, there was a Republican House. When the bill 
went over there, having been a Governor and having watched how State 
legislatures worked, I assumed that the Republican House wouldn't just 
embrace our bill but that they would do their own version of an 
immigration bill, and then we would sit down in a conference and hash 
out some middle ground. No. I was wrong. The Republican majority House 
decided to bottle the bill up in committee. They never took it up and 
never did their own bill. That was in 2013--the education of a naive 
Senator.
  Years later, in 2018, during the Trump administration, when we had a 
Republican majority in this body, we dealt directly with President 
Trump. He wanted $25 billion in border security over 10 years. We 
basically came up with an offer that was, Can you take yes for an 
answer?
  I was part of an eight-member crew negotiating a bipartisan deal: 
protection for Dreamers and $25 billion in border security--every penny 
Donald Trump asked for and not one penny less. He told us that he 
supported Dreamers. He told us that if the bill got to him, he would 
sign it. Because we had a Democratic House, if we could get it through 
this body, we would get it to President Trump's desk. But as soon as we 
rolled out the bill with eight Democrats and eight Republicans as 
cosponsors, President Trump did a 180, turn tail. He trashed the 
Dreamers. He said the bill was awful and encouraged Republicans to vote 
against it, and we couldn't get to the 60-vote margin.
  So, for the second time, we did a bipartisan deal that was going to 
do good things and invest a whole lot in border security that was 
killed by President Trump and now this most recent effort.
  I so applaud Senator Murphy, Senator Sinema, Senator Lankford, and 
others from the administration who worked on this deal, a bipartisan 
border security provision with other important provisions: the 
normalization of Afghan refugees. We have more in Virginia than almost 
any other State. There is really important work in this bill--
bipartisan.
  It is not lost on me how hard it is to do a deal where both the 
American Immigration Lawyers Association and the Border Patrol union, 
which tend to be quite opposite politically, take a look at a 
compromise and say: You know, this isn't perfect, but we need to do 
this.
  I don't know of another issue where these two organizations have 
said: We need to do this. That was the needle that these Senators were 
able to thread after months and months and months of negotiation.
  But just as in the first two instances, a significant effort to 
protect our border and make our country safer in a bipartisan way got 
shot down when President Trump came out and encouraged Republicans to 
oppose it. Even though they had been briefed on the negotiation every 
step of the way and supported it, as soon as President Trump said they 
should oppose it, folks turned tail and ran. President Trump was 
honest. I mean, I will give him this. He was honest about the reason.

[[Page S3831]]

He didn't say to oppose it because he didn't like clause A or clause C. 
He pretty much said: We don't want to fix this problem. We would rather 
raise heck about this problem and blame Joe Biden about this problem 
than fix this problem.
  We are sent here to solve problems, and when we have a bipartisan 
solution that fits this narrow window where both left and right say it 
is the right step to take, we should do it. I am so glad that this is 
going to be up on the floor for a vote tomorrow. I look forward to 
joining my colleagues in supporting it. I urge others to do the same.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.
  Ms. STABENOW. Madam President, I am really pleased to be here on the 
floor with my colleagues who just want to get something done on the 
border. I mean, how long have we talked about this? Senator Kaine 
talked about 2013. I was here as well. It was an amazingly difficult 
piece of legislation to negotiate at the time, but it was 
comprehensive, and in the end, it was a big bipartisan vote in the U.S. 
Senate.
  I agree with Senator Kaine. When it went to the House, we thought: 
OK. We put together this comprehensive bill that is not only border 
security, it is about how we manage and create a pathway to citizenship 
and address young people who have been here their whole lives--who have 
been here as juniors--and for agriculture jobs, which I work with all 
the time. Our farmers need ag labor and want to know there is a legal 
path to be able to have people work here. It covered everything. At 
that time, Republicans in the House didn't want to deal with it, didn't 
want to solve it.

  So we have been down this road before, but I really did think, this 
time, in the context of the national security bill, the demand from 
Republican colleagues, that they wouldn't consider the supplemental 
security issues without a tough border bill. I said: OK, here we go.
  We all know, there were major negotiations, months of negotiations. 
Senator Murphy, Senator Sinema, Senator Lankford--everybody was 
stretching and pushing and trying to get to a spot for something that 
would really, really make a difference.
  They did, and the vast majority of us said OK, we are going to 
support it. But that was 105 days ago--105 days ago that Republican 
colleagues had a chance to solve the issue that they come to the floor 
to speak on every day. They keep coming to the floor every day saying: 
We need you to do something about the border. We need you to do 
something about the border.
  Well, we offered a bipartisan bill--a tough bill--to do something 
about the border, and at the last minute, they said no.
  I want to speak for a moment about one piece in here that is so 
important. We think about the southern border, and there is certainly 
funding in here for the northern border. But one of the things that is 
in here I know our Presiding Officer cares deeply about as well, 
affects every part of the country--it certainly affects Michigan--is 
the capacity to stop the flow of deadly fentanyl. It is so important, 
and it is in this bill.
  On April 2 the Justice Department announced the largest law 
enforcement seizure of fentanyl in the entire history of Michigan, 
April 2. Forty kilos of fentanyl were found--enough to kill every 
single Michigan resident.
  On April 19, a Michigan medical examiner raised the alarm on what was 
quoted as a really bad patch of fentanyl in Michigan and warned the 
public that there had been 6 drug overdoses in 11 days, raising the 
flag of what was going on here. It only takes one pill to be able to 
cause a death.
  These are just two headlines from last month in Michigan, and they do 
not come close to encapsulating the pain and the tragedy Michigan 
families have faced over the years due to drug overdoses.
  So we have got to do more to combat the fentanyl crisis. This bill 
does that. This bill actually does that. We need to give the U.S. 
Customs and Border Protection the tools they need to stop the drug from 
crossing the border to combat the fentanyl crisis. This bill would 
invest in 2,400 more in Customs and Border Protection officers--
desperately needed--and new innovative inspection equipment to decrease 
detection. We know there are all kinds of ways it is coming in, from 
tires in every part of a vehicle--every imaginable way it is coming 
in--and there is equipment that can detect that. We need that new 
innovative equipment at the border to help our agents.
  Drug Enforcement Agency efforts to disrupt drug trafficking networks 
in Mexico, in this bill; enhanced lab analysis of fentanyl samples, in 
this bill; improve technology for autonomous capabilities, air assets, 
in this bill--in the bill we will be voting on tomorrow.
  So when we hear colleagues talking about doing something about drug 
overdoses, about fentanyl, they have a chance tomorrow to vote to do 
that.
  But it has been 105 days since Republicans were given the opportunity 
for a strong bipartisan bill that included fentanyl efforts, and 105 
days ago they killed the bill.
  We know why. We know why. It has been said over and over again: 
Donald Trump told them to. He called people, and he said: ``We don't 
want to solve this. We want chaos. That is my middle name.'' Maybe it 
is his first name, I don't know. But chaos, chaos, chaos: ``We want 
people to be afraid. We want chaos. We don't care if people are getting 
hurt or what is happening.''
  He actually was quoted as saying: ``Please blame it on me.'' I want 
you to vote against it. ``Please blame it on me,'' which we are more 
than happy to do because it was him. It was him.
  We want to solve the challenges at the border. We know they are 
serious, and we want to give the Biden administration additional tools 
to solve them.
  They want that. In every single budget since President Biden was 
elected--every single budget--he has asked for more resources to do the 
things in this bill. And folks have said no, no, no, no, no.
  This legislation does what needs to be done. And as I said before, it 
was toughly negotiated in a bipartisan manner, and we appreciate that.
  Let's be clear. This bill would significantly improve our Nation's 
security in a number of important ways. It would reform the broken 
asylum system so that decisions would be made more quickly on who 
should be allowed to remain in the country and who should be deported.
  Those allowed to stay would be provided authorization to work so that 
they could take care of themselves and their families and fill crucial 
jobs in our economy while waiting for their cases to be resolved.
  The legislation would create a new emergency authority that would 
allow the President of the United States to pause the processing of 
asylum claims of migrants who arrive between ports of entry when cases 
rise above a certain point.
  It would expand legal pathways to citizenship and increase access to 
work authorizations--something that Republicans claim to support.
  And those immigrants who serve in our military--who serve in our 
military--would gain quicker access to citizenship--something I think 
we can all agree they have earned.
  People sometimes forget that Michigan, my home State, is a border 
State. This bill would provide up to $100 million in grants to States 
and local and Tribal law enforcement agencies to secure the northern 
border, which is extremely important to me and the people I represent.
  Republicans say they care about solving the challenges at the border. 
Their actions, unfortunately, show otherwise.
  We stand ready to pass this legislation. We stand ready to strengthen 
our border security and to keep our communities safe. We are ready to 
do it. Let's go.
  Tomorrow, our Republican colleagues will be given another chance to 
join us to pass this bipartisan bill, and I urge them to vote yes.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Delaware.
  Mr. CARPER. Madam President, for years, many of our colleagues have 
said on this Senate floor, they have said in committee hearing rooms, 
they have said on cable news shows that there is a crisis at our 
southern border. And they have been right.
  Well, today, we actually have the opportunity to do something about 
it. Once again, we have bipartisan legislation before us that works to 
address

[[Page S3832]]

the challenges of a broken and decades-old immigration system.
  Along with our other colleagues here this afternoon, I rise to urge 
all Members of the Senate to put aside politics, to do what I think we 
all believe to be the right thing, and to vote in favor of the 
bipartisan Border Act.
  As a former chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental 
Affairs Committee, I know that we have tried to come together in 
Congress to fix our immigration system for about as long as I can 
remember, under Presidents and congressional leadership of both 
parties.
  Our colleagues have oftentimes heard me say that bipartisan solutions 
are lasting solutions, and that is true. And in the case of fixing our 
Nation's immigration laws, that has never been more true.
  Thanks to the tireless work of a Democrat from Connecticut, a 
Republican from Oklahoma, and an Independent from Arizona, along with 
members of their staffs, we have reached a bipartisan compromise on one 
of the toughest issues our country faces today.
  I am proud to say that after 4 long months of negotiations between 
our three colleagues and members of the Biden administration, including 
the Secretary of Homeland Security, we have crafted the strongest 
border security bill in decades.
  The legislation produced during these negotiations proved that 
bipartisanship is not just aspirational; it is ours for the grasp; it 
is ours for the taking. The legislation produced during these 
negotiations proves that bipartisanship is not just aspirational, but 
it is actually possible.
  Yet despite all of this hard work and the countless hours our 
colleagues invested in hammering out this critical piece of 
legislation, many of our Republican colleagues rejected this same bill 
earlier this year, largely at the behest of Donald Trump.
  I would like to quote again, as Senator Stabenow has, what Donald 
Trump said on his social media account earlier this year. This is a 
quote:

       Republicans should stop wasting their time on immigration 
     until after we elect more Senators and Congressmen/women in 
     November. Dems are just playing games, have no intention of 
     doing anything to solve this decades-old problem. We can pass 
     great legislation after the Red Wave.

  While Democrats, Republicans, and Independents negotiated in good 
faith, it was Donald Trump who decided he would rather attempt to sow 
chaos--chaos at the border, rather than to deal with it and to fix it.
  It was also incredibly disappointing to see so many of our Republican 
colleagues, especially in the House, turn their backs on this 
bipartisan approach and play politics with our immigration policy. They 
chose to put Donald Trump first over what is best for our country.
  Fixing the crisis at our southern border requires tough policy 
choices, but it also gives us an opportunity to seek some wisdom from 
the Scripture. I believe we need to look no further than the New 
Testament's Matthew 25, where we find these words: When I was a 
stranger in your land, did you welcome me? That is what it says: When I 
was a stranger in your land, did you welcome me?
  Many immigrants seeking refuge here oftentimes leave their home 
countries and brave horrible conditions at home in order to seek a 
better life in this country--a life of freedom and a life of 
opportunity.
  We know all too well the factors that have contributed to the 
challenges at our border. Among them are a global pandemic, increased 
violence and criminal activity, the smuggling of illicit narcotics, and 
our Nation's own devastating addiction to illegal drugs, not to mention 
authoritarian government rule and poverty throughout the Southern 
Hemisphere. Those are just some of the root causes.
  If we are serious about addressing the challenges of our immigration 
system, it is imperative that we focus on these root causes of 
migration.
  The bipartisan Border Act before us would finally work to make our 
country safer by increasing resources and implementing policy changes 
both at the border and to our immigration system as a whole.
  This legislation has numerous endorsements from some unlikely places, 
including the Border Patrol union and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
  So today, we now have another opportunity to choose policy over 
politics, to choose principle over politics. Everyone on the Senate 
floor today knows that improving the security of our border is not just 
good policy; it is the right thing to do.
  In fact, some 84 percent of all voters in this country believe that 
we should be prioritizing reforms to our immigration system rather than 
sticking to the status quo--84 percent.
  As U.S. Senators, we are elected to serve our constituents, the 
American people, and we have an opportunity today to meet that 
responsibility by enacting the legislation that is before us. Our three 
Senate colleagues have proven that working together is possible, and 
now it is up to the rest of us to do the right thing.
  Let's finish the job. Let's implement a lasting solution, and let's 
do it together.
  With that, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Hampshire.
  Mrs. SHAHEEN. Madam President, I agree with my colleagues. We have a 
crisis at our southern border. And in New Hampshire, it is affecting us 
because there are too many deadly drugs flowing into our country and 
not enough technology and equipment and personnel to stop it.
  So it is not every day that I agree with my Republican colleagues on 
an issue as big as the border, but on this one, I agree.
  We needed to act. That is why a group of negotiators--Republicans 
were led by Senator Lankford; Democrats, by Senator Murphy and Senator 
Sinema. I appreciate the work that all three of them did. They rolled 
up their sleeves. They got to work. For months, they passed paper back 
and forth. They ironed out big and small details of the bill that we 
voted on, that is before us.
  And the final agreement is the strictest--I think that is worth 
repeating. It is the strictest border security legislation that we have 
seen certainly since my time in the Senate. It is a historic agreement 
to supply the border with critical resources that are necessary to 
increase security, to stop the flow of illicit drugs, and to better 
protect all Americans.
  Now, our Republican colleagues were for this bill until Donald Trump 
put his thumb on the scale and said: Don't fix the border. I want to 
campaign on it as a crisis.
  And as we heard, he acknowledged that we should blame him for the 
fact that the border deal failed.
  But, unfortunately, our colleagues walked away from the strictest 
border security deal that we have had in decades, all because Donald 
Trump told them to make it a campaign issue rather than do what is in 
the best interest of the country.
  Now, we need to pass this bill because it includes more funding for 
identifying, tracking, and stopping fentanyl at the border. I don't 
know about all of our colleagues, but in my home State of New 
Hampshire, we have lost too many people because they have died from 
fentanyl overdoses. In the period from 2013 to 2023, New Hampshire lost 
4,616 people from drug overdoses--4,616. The majority of those people 
died as the result of fentanyl. About 70 percent of those deaths were 
the result of fentanyl.
  And anything--anything--we can do to cut down on the amount of 
fentanyl that is coming into the United States, we ought to be doing 
it. We know that fentanyl is moved across the U.S.-Mexico border in 
huge quantities, often in cars and trucks, and we know that it comes 
across--almost 100 percent--at our ports of entry. And they can't 
search every vehicle in every way, and that is why we need technology.
  We need to be able to scan vehicles for drugs and other contraband. 
We need to make sure they can expand these capacities, which is why 
there is a provision in the bill to provide significant increases in 
funding for CBP to deploy more nonintrusive inspection technology that 
would more efficiently and effectively search for fentanyl and other 
drugs.
  The bill also gives Immigration and Customs Enforcement increased 
funding to focus on counter-fentanyl investigations and enforcement, 
because we need more boots on the ground dedicated to finding fentanyl 
and other drugs and dedicated to holding those accountable who are 
bringing these deadly drugs into our country.

[[Page S3833]]

  The danger of the continued fentanyl epidemic demands more action 
from Congress. We need more funding. We need more agents on our 
borders. And with this bill, we would do just that.
  Now, New Hampshire doesn't border our southern border, but it does 
border Canada, which has the longest international border in the 
world--over 5,000 miles. New Hampshire has a very short piece of that, 
but there are many stretches of the border, particularly in New 
Hampshire, that are remote, that are sparsely populated, and, unlike 
many other borders, not militarized.
  That means our northern border is vulnerable to exploitation. And we 
have a program that we have had in past budgets called Operation 
Stonegarden. It is in the Department of Homeland Security. So Senator 
Peters, I know, knows that program. But it helps police departments, 
providing annual grants to help them, particularly in rural areas that 
are really struggling to fund normal operations, let alone 
responsibilities along the border. These are funds that allow police 
departments to pay overtime for officers to patrol the border along 
with the U.S. Border Patrol.

  Sadly, on the northern border, most of those funds have been diverted 
to the southern border, and many of our agents who have patrolled the 
northern border have been diverted to the southern border. That is a 
challenge for States like New Hampshire and others, where we have large 
sections of that border that are rural, where, in parts of New 
Hampshire's border, we don't even have access to internet. So there are 
cameras on the border, but they can't pick up anything because we don't 
have a signal. But despite this program's importance, it has been 
underfunded for a number of years, leaving States without sufficient 
resources.
  So one of the pieces that is in this legislation that we are going to 
vote on tomorrow is $100 million, with 25 percent of it that would go 
to States that are not on the southwest border--States like New 
Hampshire--to make sure that our law enforcement is also supported and 
well funded.
  So we have a lot to do with our border. Passing this bill tomorrow, 
getting our Republican colleagues to join us, would make a huge 
difference in addressing the challenges at our southern border. I hope 
that they will join us, that they will put aside the opposition from 
Donald Trump, and that they will do what is in the best interest of the 
country, not what is in the best interest of Donald Trump.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.
  Mr. PETERS. Madam President, tomorrow, the Senate will consider 
legislation that would send critical resources to secure our borders. 
This legislation was forged by serious bipartisan negotiations, but 
when it first came to the Senate floor this past February as part of a 
foreign aid package, my Republican colleagues voted against it and 
blocked us from even having a debate on this most serious of issues.
  They plan, unfortunately, to do the same tomorrow. They are, once 
again, refusing to even come to the table to help strengthen our border 
security and support lawful trade and travel that drives our economy.
  This bill is not perfect. It is not comprehensive immigration reform. 
We must keep working toward a broader approach where we modernize 
immigration laws and address the immigration system as a whole. But we 
cannot let that hold us back from taking action right now to secure our 
borders. This legislation is a meaningful step in the right direction. 
It would address some of our most pressing challenges on the issue and 
tackle them head-on.
  The bill would allow us to hire more than 2,000 CBP officers, 
addressing a critical shortage of frontline personnel who safeguard our 
national security at points of entry each and every day. It would 
provide $2 billion for advanced screening technology. This would allow 
CBP to expand use of these tools, helping them to identify illegal 
cargo and stop dangerous drugs like fentanyl from reaching and 
poisoning our communities. Fentanyl overwhelmingly enters this country 
through our ports of entry.
  This bill also aims to change the asylum application process, a 
priority that Congress has been unable to pass for decades.
  Republicans in Congress certainly like to talk about the need to 
secure our borders, but they use this issue to stoke fear in our 
communities all across the country. But when you get a commonsense 
bill, like the bill that we have before us, to vote on--a bill that 
aims to address the problems they claim that they want to solve--they 
simply walk away.
  They talk the talk, but they refuse to walk the walk. We need to walk 
the walk. And that is why Republicans walked away last February. They 
took orders from Donald Trump, when he told them to vote against this 
bipartisan legislation. They made it abundantly clear that Republicans 
would rather campaign on this issue than actually fix it. They would 
rather throw rocks than solve the problems facing our country. And, 
unfortunately, it looks like they are going to do it all again 
tomorrow.
  Americans deserve better. Our communities deserve better. Our 
frontline personnel deserve better. The victims of the fentanyl crisis 
deserve better. Those fleeing often horrendous conditions in their home 
countries and seeking asylum on our southern border, they deserve 
better. And it is an absolute shame that my Republican colleagues have 
decided not to act, because these challenges are not going to go away 
on their own.
  As chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, I have worked hard to 
craft bipartisan bills and pass commonsense border security legislation 
in my committee. I have had the opportunity to work with key Senators 
on this issue, including Senators Lankford, Sinema, and Murphy, who 
helped broker this deal in the first place; and I am going to keep 
working with any Member of this Chamber who is willing to come together 
and find common ground and forge solutions to help our country. And I 
hope some Republicans join me.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wisconsin.
  Ms. BALDWIN. Madam President, I rise today in support of securing our 
border and taking action to fix our broken immigration system.
  Let's back up for a minute. Fixing our broken immigration system and 
securing our border has evaded Congress for decades. We have poured 
many hours and much ink into trying to solve the very real issues that 
we have, and we have come close. I was proud to advance the bipartisan 
Gang of 8 immigration reform that would have tightened border security, 
provided pathways to citizenship for those already here, and expanded 
work visas. I, along with many in this Chamber, also voted for a 
bipartisan bill that would have given a path to citizenship for the 1.8 
million Dreamers who came to our country as children.
  We nearly passed the Common Sense Plan, a bill that would have 
invested $25 billion in border security and also provided a pathway to 
citizenship for our Dreamers. All of these efforts--every single one of 
them--died at the hands of congressional Republicans.
  Recently, Democrats and Republicans came to the table, yet again, to 
find a path forward on border security and fixes to our immigration 
system. Together, my colleagues from both parties worked hard to find a 
bipartisan compromise, and they did. The result was a strong measure, 
even endorsed by the largest Border Patrol union, that curbs the flow 
of fentanyl from coming across our border, expedites our asylum 
process, and boosts border security. Then, many Republicans walked away 
again, apparently deciding that it was better politics not to secure 
our border.
  And what hits closest to home for me and every family who has watched 
a loved one pass away from fentanyl poisoning or an overdose is that we 
have a real chance to disrupt the flow of these dangerous drugs into 
our communities.
  In the 2-year period from 2021 to 2022, over 2,800 Wisconsinites died 
of an opioid-related overdose. In just 2 years, thousands of Wisconsin 
families lost a loved one and gained an empty seat at the dinner table.
  I have heard from countless parents devastated by losing their child. 
One mother, Michelle, got a call one November morning in 2021 notifying 
her that her son Cade, a freshman at UW-Milwaukee, had passed away. The 
night

[[Page S3834]]

before, Cade had gone out with friends in his dorm. He took one pill 
that he thought was Percocet. It turned out to be 100 percent fentanyl.
  Michelle told me earlier this year that Cade ``had his entire life 
ahead of him. He was home from college the weekend before he died 
talking about changing his major to psychology and how he wanted to 
travel the world. He deserved to learn from his mistake, not die from 
it. He didn't overdose from taking one pill. He was poisoned.''
  That is the stark reality of fentanyl: One pill can kill. In 2020, 
over 85 percent of opioid deaths in Wisconsin were connected to a 
synthetic or manufactured opioid like fentanyl. We can and we must do 
more to stop illicit drugs from coming into our communities. We have 
that chance in front of us right now.
  We are bringing this bill back up because this is what the American 
people are demanding. While Wisconsin is not on the southern border, we 
are impacted by the flow of fentanyl coming across that border, and 
Wisconsinites want action. This bipartisan border compromise is that 
action.
  This legislation will invest in 100 new cutting-edge inspection 
machines that help detect fentanyl at our ports of entry. This bill 
would also strengthen border security with more than 2,400 new Customs 
and Border Protection officers at our southwest border and give the 
President new authority to shut down the border when the system is 
overwhelmed.
  Not only would this compromise combat the fentanyl crisis, but this 
also gives us the opportunity to take on an immigration system that has 
been broken for decades. If passed, this bill would invest in asylum 
officers and immigration judges to expedite the process. We would also 
send more resources to help communities across this country struggling 
to provide critical services to newcomers and expedite work permits for 
people who are in this country and qualify so that newcomers can 
provide for their families and help us meet workforce demands for 
Wisconsin businesses and farms.
  With communities across Wisconsin and the country receiving migrants, 
this bill would deliver the necessary resources so that our local boots 
on the ground can effectively welcome those legally entering this 
country and not stress their often-stretched budgets.
  Many Republicans walked away from this deal that they negotiated more 
than 100 days ago because some would rather make this a campaign issue. 
Well, I, for one, would prefer to make a difference. Our constituents 
expect--frankly, they demand--that we come here and work in good faith 
and find compromise where possible.
  Our colleagues found a compromise on immigration reform and securing 
our border. Is it perfect? No. Would it have been a huge step in the 
right direction? Yes. I, nor anyone else, got everything that they 
wanted. This bill is a compromise, and there is more work to do. Even 
if we pass this bill, we must remain committed to fixing our 
immigration system, including creating a clear path to citizenship for 
immigrants already here, especially our Dreamers.
  But in this instance, we cannot let the perfect be the enemy of the 
good. We cannot allow politics to win out over progress. We cannot 
allow the same old Washington games to stop us from saving lives. Right 
now, we have a chance to take a step in the right direction, a chance 
to do the right thing for moms like Michelle and every parent who has 
lost a child to fentanyl. Let's do something together right now to 
secure our border, stop the flow of fentanyl, fix our broken 
immigration system, and make a real difference for Americans.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.
  Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Madam President, I am honored to join my colleagues 
in this colloquy and to support this measure. We are nearing the end of 
the debate for today. We are nearing a vote tomorrow.
  But the debate will continue, and we will have other votes. Whether 
this measure passes or not tomorrow, it is only the beginning of what 
we need to do. So that debate nationally and in this body will 
continue. And there will be votes on other steps that carry forward the 
effort that this bipartisan security act reflects.
  But we must act. Everyone agrees that we must act to make our border 
more secure, to fix our broken immigration system, to find a path 
toward earned citizenship for millions--tens of millions--of 
undocumented people in this country who are paying taxes and playing by 
the rules and, of course, for the Dreamers and for people seeking visas 
so they can work here and fill jobs that otherwise will be vacant.
  We often hear Republicans talk about the need to secure the border. I 
sit on the Judiciary Committee where it seems like my Republican 
colleagues want to talk and talk and talk about the border. Every 
hearing, every markup, regardless of our actual agenda, they want to 
talk. Republicans want to talk about the border so much that they sent 
us contrived Articles of Impeachment against a Cabinet Secretary for 
the first time in 150 years. More talk.
  Politics is the reason that this body failed to pass this measure 
just months ago. So for Republican colleagues who now claim politics is 
the reason we are here--yes, their politics, their presumptive 
Presidential nominee saying that they should not vote for it because of 
the political advantage they would have from keeping it as an issue. 
They made clear that all they want to do about the border is talk and 
use it politically.
  Democrats spent months negotiating with Republicans. I give great 
credit to my colleagues, Senator Murphy, Senator Sinema, Senator 
Lankford, and others, who have worked on this issue over the years.
  I remember well in 2013, the Judiciary Committee overwhelmingly 
approved a bipartisan measure that then was approved by an overwhelming 
bipartisan majority in this body, and it went to the House where it 
died, not because it was voted down but simply because it had no vote. 
The Speaker of the House refused to give it a vote.
  We will have a vote tomorrow on a measure that falls way short of 
what that one did in 2013. We provided a path to earn citizenship for 
11 million then-undocumented--for the Dreamers. We provided billions of 
dollars for border security. And we reformed visa and asylum programs, 
among other ways, by enabling more fairness in that asylum system.
  This bill is the strongest measure in recent history. It was endorsed 
by the National Border Patrol Council and the union of Border Patrol 
agents.
  Let's be very clear-eyed. It was a tough compromise. It limited 
asylum claims in ways that many Democrats and I remain concerned about 
doing. But it includes some key Democratic priorities, including 
providing new pathways to citizenship for our Afghan at-risk allies, 
ensuring legal representation to vulnerable children under 13 
attempting to navigate the immigration process on their own, and 
providing for new ways for family members to enter the United States 
legally for short stays to visit relatives and attend major life 
events. That is an issue I have worked with colleagues across the aisle 
for years as well as some of those other provisions.
  These are key parts of the Democratic vision for immigration: fix our 
broken immigration system to continue growing our economy and maintain 
America's international leadership at a time of severe global unrest.
  It will be tough for my Republican colleagues to vote for this 
measure. It will be tough for many of us. But that is why we are here, 
and that is the measure of why it is a compromise. A lot of what is 
here, we would not choose to include.
  Let me conclude by saying, Donald Trump wants to campaign on the 
border, not fix it. The question is whether my Republican colleagues 
are so beholden to him that they will follow that lead like lemmings 
off a cliff and, at the end of the day, take the country with them.
  My Democratic colleagues and I are not giving up. To the Dreamers, we 
will keep faith with you. To the undocumented millions around the 
United States who are paying taxes, working hard, following all the 
rules, we will keep faith with you. To businesses that want more visas 
so they can have workers, skilled and others, we will keep faith with 
you. We will keep faith with America on this issue. We are not 
abandoning this effort. We are not going away.

[[Page S3835]]

  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Baldwin). The senior Senator from 
Minnesota.
  Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
following Senators be permitted to speak prior to the scheduled vote: 
Myself for up to 5 minutes, Senator Schumer for up to 2 minutes, 
Senator Murphy for up to 10 minutes, Senator Butler for up to 5 
minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Madam President, I rise today along with Senators 
Murphy and Blumenthal and so many others in support of bipartisan 
legislation to improve our immigration system.
  As we face global and domestic threats, securing our borders and 
points of entry must be a top priority. As we have discussed, we had an 
opportunity in February to move forward in a bipartisan manner on broad 
and important reforms and security measures that Senators Murphy, 
Lankford, and Sinema spent months negotiating.
  I will note that this legislation, as Senator Blumenthal noted, 
included my bipartisan bill to keep our covenant with the thousands of 
Afghans living in the United States who fought shoulder to shoulder 
with our troops. It is a top priority of the VFW and top priority of 
the American Legion, a top priority of those who have served in 
Afghanistan. These were their interpreters. These were the ones that 
gathered their intelligence. And now 80,000 of them are in our country, 
living with a trapdoor under them, not knowing if they will be sent 
back to the Taliban. They are working, yes, but what they need is 
permanent status.
  And that is what this bill that I have with Senator Graham, with 
support, on the Afghan Adjustment Act. As cosponsors, there are 
Senators like Senator Mullin and Senator Wicker, the ranking member of 
Armed Services, and Senator Risch, the ranking on Foreign Relations. 
They are all on this bill.
  When it comes to our borders, though, as we are talking about today, 
this comprehensive legislation would have invested in hiring more 
Border Patrol agents and immigration judges while giving law 
enforcement the tools and technologies they need to make a safe 
border--order at the border. It would have fixed our broken asylum 
system, providing 250,000 new employment and family visas.
  Yes, Madam President, we have another opportunity to actually right 
this wrong and get this bipartisan bill done. Border security demands 
that we invest in both our southern and northern borders, which is 
something I like about this legislation, having lived in a State that 
borders Canada--the longest border in the world, America and Canada. A 
strong, secure northern border is critical for maintaining our trade 
relations, for maintaining the terror screening database.
  And we have witnessed terrible instances of drug smuggling and human 
trafficking. Last year, Border Patrol agents and sheriff deputies in 
Kittson County, MN, stopped a human smuggling attempt. That is why this 
legislation is so important.
  And of key importance to me and I know you, Madam President, and the 
State of Wisconsin is fentanyl and the work that can be done if this 
bill passes. It not only gives the President emergency powers to shut 
down the border but also ensures that we take on fentanyl trafficking.
  These pills are getting in the hands of schoolchildren. These pills 
are getting in the hands of people who have no idea that the pills they 
have are laced with fentanyl.
  Fentanyl is the leading cause of death for Americans ages 18 to 45. 
Synthetic opioids like fentanyl kill more than 150 people a day, and a 
dose of just 2 milligrams--small enough to fit on the tip of a pencil--
can be lethal.
  These aren't just numbers. It is 22-year-old Alex Davis of West St. 
Paul, who died of a fentanyl overdose while he was a student at the 
University of North Dakota; 32-year-old Katie Flick from Erskine, MN, 
who was killed by a fake pill laced with fentanyl; Devin Norring from 
Hastings, who bought a Percocet over Snapchat that wasn't really a 
Percocet, laced with fentanyl. It killed him. He was only 19.
  That is why we call on our colleagues to join us in support of the 
Border Act. This legislation, supported by Border Patrol agents, gives 
law enforcement officers significant funding and support to hire more 
officers and intercept fentanyl coming into our country.
  I thank Senators Lankford, Murphy, and Sinema for their work on this 
bill. I thank Senator Schumer and Senator McConnell for their 
leadership.
  There is not controversy about this bill except on the political 
side. If you look at this from the viewpoint of Americans and what 
makes people safer and what will stop kids from dying because they take 
one pill and they don't know there is fentanyl in it, the answer is 
simple: Vote for this bill.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democratic leader.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, first, I want to thank Senator Murphy 
for organizing this important floor block. I want to thank all of my 
colleagues who participated. I see Senator Blumenthal, of course 
Senator Klobuchar, and others who participated.
  What we are talking about is the need to pass our bipartisan border 
bill to crack down on fentanyl entering our country. Every one of us in 
our States has talked to families who have lost loved ones because of 
fentanyl, particularly young people, and it breaks your hearts. Some of 
these family members didn't even know their loved ones had taken 
fentanyl and were dead within 24 hours--just gone. I have experienced 
that with some families.
  So now we have a chance to do something with it in this bill. 
Tomorrow, Senators face an important decision: Will both sides come 
together to advance a bipartisan border security bill or will 
partisanship get in the way yet again?
  Three months ago, Donald Trump told his Republican allies to block 
the strongest bipartisan border bill Congress has seen in a 
generation--something that would have done a great deal to stop the 
flow of vicious fentanyl into the United States.
  So we are trying again tomorrow because we hear about these families 
that Senator Klobuchar mentioned, that I mentioned, that others have 
mentioned. We have to. And I hope this time our Republicans will join 
us to achieve a different outcome.
  Unlike H.R. 2, a very partisan bill, this bipartisan bill was written 
with the goal of getting 60 votes in the Senate. It had input from both 
Republicans and Democrats. H.R. 2 can't claim that. It was totally put 
together by Republicans, got virtually no Democratic support. If 
anything is political, it is H.R. 2--has been used politically but 
never seriously to get something done.
  So let's be perfectly clear. Our bipartisan border bill represents a 
real chance--in fact, the best chance in decades--to act on border 
security.
  The bill would make huge strides towards cracking down on the scourge 
of fentanyl, deliver billions for the DEA, for DHS, to hire officers to 
focus exclusively on drugs, and billions--we now have state-of-the-art 
equipment that can detect the flow of drugs at the border. Why the heck 
aren't we allocating the money to pay for it instead of playing 
political games? We should be doing that right now.
  I thank my Democratic colleagues who today are here highlighting how 
this bill does more than anything we have done thus far to deal with 
the scourge of fentanyl.
  If you told me a year ago that this was the kind of bill that we had 
before us, that really cracked down on fentanyl, which we must fight, I 
would have thought we would have had a good chance, and we thought 
Republicans would have leapt at the opportunity to enact this bill into 
law. By objective measure, it is strong, it is necessary.
  So, tomorrow, we are going to have a clear choice. Tomorrow, we will 
see who is serious about actually wanting to fix the border, who is 
serious about actually cracking down on fentanyl, and those who prefer 
to merely talk about it.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.
  Mr. MURPHY. Madam President, tomorrow, we are going to have a chance 
to come together, Republicans and Democrats, to be able to secure our 
border, make better sense of our immigration system. This is what the 
American people want us to do. They don't elect us to hold press 
conferences. They don't elect us to post on social media.

[[Page S3836]]

They don't elect us to argue. They elect us to solve problems.
  To my great gladness, there are Republicans who are willing to solve 
these problems. Senator Lankford is one of them. Senator Sinema, an 
Independent, Senator Lankford, and I sat in a room for 4 months, and we 
negotiated a bipartisan compromise--a compromise--that would allow us 
to get tougher on our southern border, to make sure that only the right 
people are coming into the United States, those that have a legitimate 
claim of asylum, those that are legitimately fleeing terror and 
torture. That would create a more compassionate, more effective, more 
efficient system of immigration.
  We were engaged in this process because Republicans demanded it. 
Republicans said: We want you to pass bipartisan immigration reform. We 
want you to get to a result. We will vote for it if you achieve that 
result.
  They selected Senator Lankford as the chosen negotiator.
  We achieved that result. Senator McConnell was in the room for those 
negotiations. It was endorsed by some of the most conservative outlets 
and organizations in the country, including the Chamber of Commerce, 
the Wall Street Journal, and the very conservative Border Patrol union. 
But it only got four Republican votes.
  So I want to talk for just a minute about why that happened, what the 
bill does, and why it is important that we have another vote this week.
  First, let's just talk briefly about what this bill does.
  Probably first and most importantly, it fixes the broken immigration 
system, the asylum system in particular. Right now, you come to this 
country and apply for asylum, it takes sometimes as long as 10 years 
before you get your claim heard. That is not fair. That is not fair for 
the individual who is applying, but that is not fair for others who are 
waiting outside of the country to try to come to the United States. It 
is not fair for communities that ultimately have to house and provide 
services for all of those individuals who are waiting to apply for 
asylum. So this bill fixes that broken system. It takes that 5- or 10-
year wait down to weeks or months.
  This bill gives the President emergency authorities to close down 
portions of the border when crossings get too high. You can't handle 
10,000 people a day at the border. We all know that, Republicans and 
Democrats. The American public knows that. They saw that chaos at the 
end of last year. This bill says the President, whether you are 
Republican or Democrat, has the emergency authority to close down the 
border during times of high crossings.
  This bill makes significant investments in combating fentanyl. My 
colleagues have talked about the scourge of fentanyl, hundreds and 
hundreds of people dying in my State, thousands across this country. 
This bill invests significant new resources in stopping the flow of 
drugs across our border. It is a $20 billion investment overall. Much 
of that money is targeted toward fentanyl.
  Then it just takes a bunch of commonsense steps to treat those who 
are coming to the United States in a more humane way. It says that if 
you are coming here and you have a legitimate claim of asylum, you 
should be able to work while your claim is being processed, that you 
should have a right to a lawyer during that process, that we should 
provide a little bit of money for young kids, for 8-year-olds to have 
representation. It provides a pathway to citizenship for certain really 
critical populations, including Afghans, including the children of H-2B 
holders.
  Inside this bill are a number of really important reforms, and the 
system just makes more sense, it is more effective, it is more humane. 
But at the foundation of this bill is border security--making sure we 
have a border that is manageable, that is not chaotic.
  I agree with my colleagues--this bill does not do everything we need 
to do to reform our broken immigration system. Of course I want a 
pathway to citizenship for people that are living in the shadows. I 
want to make sure that those kids who know nothing except for being 
Americans have a chance to stay here permanently. But this bill is a 
really important downpayment--a really important bipartisan downpayment 
on border security and immigration reform.
  The question is, Why did it fail? Why did a bill that had the support 
of Senator Lankford, the appointed negotiator, and had the support of 
Senator McConnell fail? And the answer is simple: Donald Trump told 
Republicans to kill the bill. Donald Trump told Republicans that their 
party would be better off if the border was a mess, if nothing passed, 
because more Republicans would get elected this November if there were 
scenes of chaos at the border. So even though you have a bipartisan 
border bill, kill it because politically it is better for Republicans 
if the border is a mess.

  That is not my analysis; that is literally what Republicans have said 
on the record repeatedly. Senator McConnell said it himself, said: 
Donald Trump told us to do nothing. Senator McConnell didn't say: 
Donald Trump told us to write a better bill; he said: Donald Trump told 
Senate Republicans to do nothing.
  So that is why we are here today, because the American public wants 
us to pass bipartisan border security legislation, Democrats want to 
pass bipartisan border security legislation, but as far as I can tell, 
Republicans do not because they want the border to be a mess.
  We will see tomorrow. We will have another chance. If this is an 
emergency like Republicans say, then let's give it one more shot.
  Let me end with this because I do think it is important to just 
explore for a minute why keeping this issue of immigration unsolved, 
keeping the border chaotic, is so important to Republicans and in 
particular to Donald Trump. The reason is that making Americans afraid 
of each other, turning us against each other, is the centerpiece of 
Donald Trump's message and thus, for this election at least, the 
centerpiece of the Republican platform.
  The idea is to keep the border broken, to keep the immigration system 
broken because it helps breed and maintain resentment towards 
immigrants, towards people that are different from you.
  Just last month, Trump said this. He said: Immigrants are not human; 
they are animals.
  I mean, if a major political figure said that 20 years ago, there 
would be, I think, Republicans and Democrats both standing up and 
condemning that kind of language. Donald Trump calls immigrants 
animals, says they are not human--he says it on a regular basis--and he 
is celebrated by Republicans.
  I wish this weren't true. I wish it weren't a foundational aspect of 
modern republicanism to try to turn us against each other, to try to 
make us afraid of people who are coming to this country just to save 
their families' lives, but that is where we are. That is where we are. 
But that doesn't obviate us from the responsibility to govern.
  So Republicans can complain that we are asking them to vote on a 
negotiated, bipartisan compromise, because it is inconvenient for them 
to vote against a bill that was endorsed by high-profile Senate 
Republicans and by high-profile conservative groups. It is inconvenient 
for them to vote against a bill that actually brings security to the 
border, that fixes the problem that they want to be fixed, but that is 
our job.
  Our job is to come here and not just do press conferences, not just 
search for clicks online. Our job is to fix problems, and the broken 
border and our broken immigration system is a problem. This bill 
doesn't fix all of those problems, but it is the biggest fix we have 
had a chance to vote on in a generation.
  So, yes, we need to vote on this again to give Republicans the chance 
to do the right thing, to choose the security of this country, to 
choose fixing a problem that they identify instead of choosing to try 
to gain some political advantage in this election, instead of choosing 
to continue to double down on this strategy of dividing Americans from 
each other. That is why we are voting tomorrow.
  I am hopeful that Republicans and Democrats will come together to 
support this important, bipartisan border security legislation.
  I yield the floor.