[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 125 (Thursday, July 30, 2026)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4360-S4365]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
AGOA EXTENSION ACT--Motion to Proceed
Ms. MURKOWSKI. Madam President, I move to proceed to Calendar No.
320, H.R. 6500.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
Motion to proceed to Calendar No. 320, H.R. 6500, a bill to
extend duty-free treatment provided with respect to imports
from certain countries in Africa under the African Growth and
Opportunity Act, to extend customs user fees, and for other
purposes.
Tribute to Lyman Hoffman
Ms. MURKOWSKI. Madam President, I come to the floor today to
congratulate my friend and former colleague in the Alaska State
Legislature. This is an individual for whom I have great respect,
Senator Lyman Hoffman.
Senator Hoffman is retiring after nearly four decades of service to
Alaska. Few legislators leave behind legacies that are measured not
only by their years of service but by the generations of lives they
have improved. Senator Hoffman--the alltime longest serving member of
the Alaska State Legislature--is one of those rare public servants.
Throughout his nearly 40 years in office, Lyman has dedicated himself
to improving the lives of Alaskans, particularly those in our State's
most remote and underserved communities. It has truly made a difference
for them.
Everyone who has spent time in the capital city of Juneau knows
exactly where the center of gravity has been. It has been with Lyman.
We have all come to appreciate and value his experience, his
knowledge, and, really, the wisdom the man has. At first, you wouldn't
expect it, as he comes across as kind of a quiet guy with a gruff, deep
voice. It is true to
[[Page S4361]]
say he is a man of not too many words, but he is also a man who knows
just exactly the right thing to say and the right time to say it.
There have been many a legislator who have found themselves in some
pretty tense budget negotiations in the senate finance committee.
Senator Hoffman holds the gavel there. And in those settings, he can
unnerve the most senior lawmaker just by sitting very quietly through
an entire committee meeting before offering just a few choice words.
When Lyman does speak, everybody listens because, again, he has this
remarkable--almost uncanny--ability to cut through the politics and
just focus on what really matters. And that is Lyman. You aren't going
to win a staring contest with him, but he can steer an entire
negotiation with just a few carefully chosen words.
As the longtime cochair of the senate finance committee, Senator
Hoffman has become one of our State's most influential leaders. Through
administrations and periods of economic uncertainty, he has earned
bipartisan respect for his careful stewardship of public resources,
deep institutional knowledge, and the ability to build practical
consensus.
And perhaps the accomplishment for which Senator Hoffman will be best
remembered is Alaska's Power Cost Equalization Endowment. He worked,
actually alongside, my father Gov. Frank Murkowski, and Lyman secured
the long-term future of a program that helps make electricity more
affordable in rural Alaska. Out in these regions, costs can be
astonishingly high and can take up to half of a household's budget.
But, today, PCE is a major success. Its endowment exceeds over a
billion dollars, and it continues to serve families and schools and
health clinics and businesses across rural Alaska.
Lyman is a little bit predictable, and I say that because I could
always--always--count on Lyman Hoffman to ask me the hard questions.
And I would give my annual address to the legislature, and Lyman would
be sitting in the back of the chamber there. He would raise his hand,
and he would say ``What are you doing to make energy cheaper?'' or
``What are you doing to help rural Alaskans?''
And I always knew it was coming. I always knew it was coming because
Lyman was consistent that way. He was practical and he was purposeful
and his clear focus--``What are you doing to help rural Alaskans?''
``What are you doing to help lower energy costs?''--that helped guide
me here on my own in the Senate.
Because what Senator Hoffman understands is that energy policy is not
just kilowatts and price per barrel; it is about whether families can
afford to heat their homes, whether elders can stay warm in the
wintertime, and whether communities have the opportunity to grow. And,
again, this is where Lyman made his mark.
As a leading advocate for Alaska's statewide weatherization program,
he helped secure more than $600 million to make homes more efficient
for Alaskans. And, again, his work reflected a very simple belief: that
every Alaskan, no matter where you live, deserves a safe, warm home.
From the days that we served in the State legislature to the present,
Lyman Hoffman has represented not only his district--which covers
Southwest Alaska and out in the Aleutians--but really he helped all
rural Alaska with genuine distinction and giving them voice, giving
them hope, and delivering real results.
And just as important as those results is the example Lyman has set
as a public servant. He has demonstrated that lasting public policy is
built through collaboration, rather than division. His influence
extended far beyond the bills that he passed, shaping both the great
State that he loves, the individuals who have served alongside him, and
those that will follow him.
And as I speak to Senator Hoffman's impressive legacy, I also want to
acknowledge that no public servant achieves these things alone. Behind
every legislative session, every late-night budget negotiation, and
every year devoted to serving Alaska, stood some key people--certainly
his staff over the years, but always--always--Senator Hoffman's family.
His wife Lillian was always there. His children Trina and Douglas--I
know that the family made countless quiet, meaningful sacrifices to
make all this work possible. So you too deserve to be recognized.
Alaska is stronger because Senator Lyman Hoffman chose to dedicate
his life to others, and his work will continue to benefit our State for
generations to come.
So congratulations, Lyman Hoffman--my friend Lyman. Thank you. At
some point--at some point--the special legislative sessions will end,
and you will be able to conclude this incredible chapter of service to
our State. And when that day arrives and long into the future, Alaskans
will remember you. We will celebrate you, and we will remain grateful
for all that you have done.
I yield the floor.
And I thank the Senator from Wyoming for the opportunity to speak.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wyoming.
Ms. LUMMIS. I thank the Senator from Alaska for visiting about a
local legislator. They are tremendously important to all of us.
Digital Asset Market Clarity Act
Madam President, yesterday I addressed this Chamber because we are
wasting time we do not have to get the digital asset market structure
bill passed, the bill called the Clarity Act. It is a strong bipartisan
path forward that we have, and it is the best way for us to give
digital assets, especially in this country, the certainty they need and
ensure the United States leads on digital asset innovation.
The way to do it is through bipartisan support of this bill. And,
again, this is a very good bill, a bill created out of necessity
because the status quo does not work.
My friend Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and I released the Lummis-
Gillibrand Responsible Financial Innovation Act together in 2022 to
give the U.S. industry the regulatory clarity it needs to thrive on
U.S. soil, to give consumers the confidence they need to participate in
our digital economy, and give law enforcement the tools they need to
crack down on illicit finance and hold bad actors accountable.
That 168-page bill would become the foundation for the Clarity Act. A
year later, in 2023, we added 100 pages with stronger consumer
protection provisions. Yet, we got feedback from colleagues that they
wanted more. So, again, we listened.
Today, this bill that was under 300 pages is more than 600 pages.
That is hundreds of pages built over 11 months of daily bipartisan
negotiations in windowless rooms where colleagues from both parties
shared their priorities, and we worked diligently to incorporate them.
Title I alone has 33 separate Democrat-driven edits. We added 23 new
sections on illicit finance at Democrats' request. Democrats secured
another 30 wins in the CFTC portion of the bill. Plus, we created the
three entirely new titles they wanted. And that is all before we even
get to ethics, where the President bent over backwards to get my
Democrat colleagues to a ``yes.''
We have 100 clear examples of compromise, and yet for some this still
isn't enough. Holding out for a perfect bill stopped being principled
months ago. It has become an excuse not to legislate at all, and the
people who pay for that excuse aren't in this room. They are the people
we are about to talk about: the digital asset industry and the
consumers who wish to participate with confidence in this digital
economy, not to mention the future generations who will miss out
because too many in this Chamber said: Not yet. I am not ready. I have
got an election in November. Don't want to do it.
The status quo in this industry doesn't work. It is not working for
the digital asset industry or law enforcement or consumers.
We have already watched exchanges collapse with no functioning
bankruptcy framework built for this asset class. And we have already
watched ordinary people stand in line for years waiting on bankruptcy
courts to claw back pennies on the dollar of what they lost.
When Celsius and Voyager went bankrupt, customer deposits didn't stay
customer deposits. They became assets in a bankruptcy pool, fought over
by creditors who had never even heard of the people who actually owned
those assets. More than 4 million
[[Page S4362]]
Americans lost access to their own money in 2022 because we don't have
the protections the Clarity Act puts in place, and thousands of them
are still sorting through bankruptcy claims today.
That is what no regulation looks like. That is not a hypothetical or
a talking point. That is real people suffering real losses, real years
spent in bankruptcy court fighting for money that should never have
been up for grabs in the first place.
Customers will, once again, be put in a nasty fight with Wall Street
law firms that they have no hope to win.
If you believe in consumer protection, we must pass this bill to give
consumers the protection in bankruptcy they deserve.
Not passing this bill means everyone in this Chamber will have to
deservedly hang their heads the next time a crypto exchange collapses--
because there will be a next time, absent regulation. No one in this
Chamber gets to act surprised by that.
It already happened. And if we don't get our acts together, it is
going to happen again to our constituents under the exact same broken
rules while we all sit here debating whether a bill with over 100
Democratic wins is still somehow not good enough.
Another FTX is not a hypothetical we are guarding against; it is a
guaranteed outcome of leaving this industry with no custody rules, no
consumer protections, and no consequences when a platform fails people.
And, by the way, foreign adversaries aren't just waiting around for
us to finish deliberating. They are moving money through the exact gaps
this bill closes--right now, today--while we hold out for something
more perfect than what is already sitting on the table.
To those who have already said they are a ``no'' vote, let me be
clear: A ``no'' vote isn't a statement against President Trump because
he has already given you what you asked for. It is a vote to keep
American consumers inside a system we already know to be flawed on a
theory that the fix wasn't good enough. It is a vote to drive American
innovation, American jobs, and American oversight of this jurisdiction
to Singapore or the UAE or whichever jurisdiction is happy to take what
we are too foolish to accept.
That is the actual choice that faces us, not Republicans versus
Democrats. It is fixed or flawed. It is America leading or America
sidelined.
We have served up this win for you and set it in front of you--over
100 wins in the base bill, an ethics agreement no other President in
American history has volunteered. And by someone who didn't even have
to give an inch but did it because he believes that much in American
innovation and what this asset class can bring for generations is worth
protecting.
Take it. Take it. Stop finding reasons not to.
I know that if we fail here, this doesn't come back next year or the
year after that. The realistic next change at market structure
legislation is likely 2030, at the earliest. In the meantime, we will
lose businesses to other countries. We lose investment and jobs and tax
revenue to jurisdictions moving faster than we are. We inhibit law
enforcement's ability to hold bad actors accountable, and we lose our
seat at the table to shape how this industry grows. At the exact same
moment, we have a chance to guide it responsibly.
We didn't get here by ceding the internet to Europe, and we cannot
afford to cede digital assets the same way, especially now that we have
already done the hard work--5\1/2\ years--putting this bill together.
The window to lead right now is wide open. The end zone is inches
away. But that window will not stay open for a body that continues to
respond to opportunity with: Not yet. I have got an election. I don't
want to take a stand.
Opportunity waits for no one.
Let's cinch up. Let's punch the ball into the end zone and pass the
CLARITY Act now.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio.
Tribute to Sergeant Wayne Franklin Phillips
Mr. HUSTED. Madam President, I am going to take us back 100 years to
August 5, 1926. It was in the midst of the Roaring Twenties. Calvin
Coolidge was the President. Babe Ruth was ruling professional baseball.
There was no television. Horses and cars shared the streets together.
Life expectancy was 57 years. The Great Depression was still off in the
future.
On August 5, 1926, a remarkable person was born, and I want to
recognize him today. He is a World War II veteran and a loving husband,
father, and grandfather. His name is SGT Wayne Franklin Phillips, and
he is approaching an extraordinary milestone--his 100th birthday.
Pretty amazing. We rise today to honor him, to reflect on his service
and sacrifice as part of a generation that secured the freedoms that we
enjoy today.
I grew up in rural Northwest Ohio, nearly in the same neighborhood as
SGT Wayne Franklin Phillips, and I am always proud of the people of
rural Northwest Ohio. SGT Wayne Phillips is from Henry County, where he
was born and raised on a farm and became a farmer in an area outside a
small town--Hamler, OH--alongside his three brothers and three sisters.
If you are ever in Hamler, OH, it is one of those places that are the
heart of agriculture in Ohio. You can see to the horizon in all four
directions, and I know the Presiding Officer from Iowa understands what
I mean by that. It is just farmland as far as you can see.
He graduated from Hamler High School at the age of 17, and he joined
the Army's 81st Readiness Division just months after receiving his high
school diploma. Of course he did. That is what a lot of people his age
did during that period of time.
During his military service, Sergeant Phillips was briefly involved
in the Battle of the Bulge. I think all of us who study our history
know that was one of the largest and bloodiest battles fought by the
American forces in World War II and really was the final battle to
defeat Hitler's Nazis.
Over the course of 41 days, hundreds of thousands of Allied troops
fought to halt that Nazi offensive in Western Europe, and they were
successful in winning the final battle that led to the end of World War
II.
His service took him to Germany, the Philippines, and Japan.
Following Japan's surrender, Sergeant Phillips quickly rose through the
ranks and earned the rank of technician fourth grade, becoming the
youngest man in charge of a motor pool servicing trucks and military
equipment. As you might expect, farm boys from Ohio knew how to fix
things, and SGT Wayne Phillips was one of those.
Like so many members of the ``greatest generation,'' Sergeant
Phillips helped defeat tyranny, liberate Europe, and preserve freedom
for future generations. Because of the service and sacrifice of many
Americans like him, our Nation and much of the world have enjoyed
liberty and peace and prosperity for most of his life since then.
We owe an enduring debt of gratitude to our veterans and more than
400,000 Americans who made the ultimate sacrifice during World War II.
After being honorably discharged in 1946, Sergeant Phillips married
his wife Eileen. Together, they raised three children: Wayne, Paul, and
Martha. Today, he is also a proud grandfather, great-grandfather, as
well as a devoted uncle.
His commitment to service did not end when he returned home. When
service is in your DNA, you serve your country, you serve your family,
and you move home and you serve your community, and that is exactly
what he did. As a respected civic leader in Henry County, he served 16
years as a Henry County commissioner and 4 years on the Deshler Village
Council.
Even as he approaches here in just a few days his 100th birthday--
this may be the most amazing thing when I think about it--SGT Wayne
Phillips continues to drive to work each day, at age 100, to the
Phillips Oil Company, the family business that he founded and continues
to operate alongside and with many members of his family. Pretty
amazing. He is also a devout man of faith. He is an active member of
the Deshler United Methodist Church and also a part of Deshler American
Legion and the Maumee Valley Sportsman's Club.
Sadly, the number of our surviving World War II veterans grows
smaller each year. I have celebrated 100th birthdays of several of
them. I always
[[Page S4363]]
love to hear their stories. You know, you put yourself in their
position--17 years old and you just graduated from high school, and you
decide you are going to go off and serve your country in a war. So many
of that generation stepped up and did that. That is why, when we honor
someone like Wayne Phillips, we honor him and many others who are part
of the most consequential chapters in our Nation's history. It is our
responsibility to ensure that their stories and their sacrifices are
never forgotten.
I say this often: We should honor what we value. We should honor what
we value. And I hope that every time any of us--and I give remarks
about veterans and World War II and the sacrifices that many
generations of Americans have made--that we honor that so that our
children hear that service and sacrifice are valued, are important.
So on August 5, SGT Wayne Franklin Phillips will celebrate his 100th
birthday. It is an honor for me to share his story with my colleagues
today--a life defined by service, family, faith, community, and in
support of our freedom. SGT Wayne Phillips is richly deserving of
recognition as he reaches this remarkable milestone.
I thank my colleagues for allowing me to honor this extraordinary
Ohioan, and I extend my heartfelt congratulations to SGT Wayne Phillips
on his 100th birthday.
Congratulations. We celebrate you and your service. God bless you,
and may God continue to bless America.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Jersey.
Mr. BOOKER. Madam President, before I begin my formal remarks, I just
want to stand here and give a formal apology to John Merlino. I have
for years maligned him. I have disrespected, disregarded him. You know
how I operate sometimes. And I just want to say he is a man of honor. I
have taken him off my list, and now he is on the good list.
So just for anyone who wants to know, the U.S. senior Senator from
New Jersey has praised John Merlino--perhaps for his first time because
he is not a man that really generates a lot of praise usually.
So I just want you to know, before I go into my formal remarks for
the day, that John Merlino--you the man.
Now, I would like for the record to separate a little bit so I can
start some of my formal remarks after I have tried to redeem the soul
of a friend and colleague.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Nomination of Todd Blanche
Mr. BOOKER. Madam President, I really believe there is a reason why
some of my Republican colleagues themselves have delayed the Blanche
nomination, because this is actually no ordinary nomination. We haven't
had a moment like this under Donald Trump where Republicans themselves
have stopped the vote. Because this is not simply a vote about one man;
it is a vote about whether the Department of Justice will remain
independent of the President of the United States.
The Attorney General of the United States of America has one client--
not a political party, not a President, not a wealthy donor, not a
political movement. The Attorney General's client is the Constitution
of the United States and the American people. That is the sacred
obligation of that office. When they are sworn in, they do not swear an
oath to the President, to Donald Trump; they swear an oath to uphold
and defend the Constitution.
Unfortunately, Todd Blanche has spent months in office demonstrating
his allegiance not to our Constitution but to the President. Time and
time again, he has shown that he is only capable of serving the
interests of one client--Donald Trump. That is why this nomination
should not simply be delayed; it should be rejected. The evidence is
overwhelming.
Congress came together in a bipartisan way to pass the Epstein Files
Transparency Act because survivors deserved answers, they deserved
justice, and the American people deserved transparency. Todd Blanche
was responsible for carrying out that law. Instead, he delayed and
delayed. He was stalling. And there was a release after the date and
deadline prescribed by Congress that was so careless that sensitive
information belonging to Epstein's survivors was exposed by the very
Department that was supposed to protect them--their phone numbers,
addresses, images, personal details.
Think about that. The survivors entrusted the Department of Justice
with some of the most painful chapters of their lives. They deserved
care. They deserved competence. They deserved honesty. They deserved an
adherence to the law. Instead, they received delays, excuses, and a
terrible, tragic breach of their privacy.
Then came the request of meeting with the survivors. For weeks, Mr.
Blanche insisted he could not meet with them unless their attorneys
were present. This was not true. A first-year law student knows that
this is not true. His own Department's policies and Federal law make
that clear.
When he finally did meet with them--the survivors--because a
Republican Senator demanded that he do it, the survivors described the
meeting as disappointing. They said they felt gaslit. They said they
were skipped over. They said Mr. Blanche was condescending to the
survivors of sexual assault.
Even then, when the survivors pleaded for continued investigation
into the Jeffrey Epstein coconspirators, Mr. Blanche once again hid
behind claims that the law prevented him from answering.
So we simply have to ask the question: Who is Todd Blanche serving
here? Is he serving the survivors? No. Is he serving the interests of
the Department of Justice? No. Is he serving the American people? No.
But we know that he rushed to the Situation Room for high-level members
of the Trump administration to strategize on how to protect the
President.
It is another clear example that the person he is there to protect is
Donald Trump.
(Mr. BUDD assumed the Chair.)
Last week, my Democratic colleagues held a Spotlight Forum to examine
Mr. Blanche's record. We heard from a courageous Epstein survivor. We
heard from ethics experts. We heard from one of Mr. Blanche's own
former colleagues from the Southern District of New York. We heard from
a former Justice official appointed under a Republican President--who
served a Republican Senator, Senator Hatch, here in this body--who was
then fired simply because he had done his job on investigations
involving Robert Mueller and Jack Smith.
Different witnesses, different backgrounds, still one conclusion from
every one of them: that Todd Blanche is unfit to lead the Department of
Justice. And if there were any doubt, the events of recent days erased
those doubts.
Mr. Blanche, in his tenure, helped negotiate a corrupt, extraordinary
settlement between Donald Trump's Department of Justice and Donald
Trump. We have heard from the Federal bench already that there was no
controversy. Donald Trump can't be on both sides of a negotiation. That
corrupt structure was exploiting the judiciary to create an environment
in which there would be a settlement, and out of that settlement, we
saw an unjust and untoward creation that outraged Americans all across
the political spectrum. They created a slush fund.
Think about what this means: The lawyer who represented Donald Trump
now oversees the Department of Justice and negotiates an agreement
between Donald Trump and Donald Trump that is not merely an appearance
of conflict, that is the definition of a conflict. It is precisely why
the Department of Justice must be independent.
If you look at this slush fund agreement, within it, there are
immunity provisions that, according to that agreement, are, to the
former senior Federal prosecutor--he said that this agreement and the
immunity provisions are ``mind-boggling in scope.'' Donald Trump got a
tax liability immunity that is extraordinary--mind-boggling in scope.
The immunity provisions alone cover broad categories with no meaningful
legal definition.
When asked about those undefined terms during his confirmation
hearing, Mr. Blanche effectively acknowledged that they could encompass
almost anything--anything. According to Blanche, he negotiated a deal
that gave Donald Trump immunity that could cover almost any kind of tax
fraud that
[[Page S4364]]
Donald Trump or his family committed.
For Donald Trump, with his former lawyer at the head of the Justice
Department, it seems like, for the President, justice has no rules,
justice has no standards, justice has no limits.
When one man receives special rules unavailable to every other
American, this is not justice; it is privilege. It is unjust privilege.
During his confirmation hearing, Mr. Blanche repeatedly promised that
he would act independently. But independence is not something you
promise; it is something you demonstrate. He has been in this position
for months and has had the chance to show us not promises but actions,
and at every important decision he has made, the same story comes out.
Who was he serving? The Constitution or Donald Trump? The answer is
unmistakable.
This vote we have in the Senate on this nominee--every Senator is
going to have to eventually cast a vote, but history is going to record
something much larger. It will record whether in this moment, the U.S.
Senate defended the independence of American justice, the independence
of the Justice Department, or did we surrender it.
Long after today's headlines are forgotten, long after today's
politics have faded, one question will remain: When the independence of
the Department of Justice was tested, where did we stand?
I know where I stand. I stand for a Department of Justice whose only
client is the American people; a Department that follows the evidence,
not politics; a Department that defends the Constitution, not a
President.
No one--not even the President of the United States--is above the
law. That principle has guided this great Republic for nearly 250
years. It is our responsibility to preserve it today. It is the oath
that we took, the commitment that we made that we will serve the people
and the ideals.
To vote for Blanche is to surrender those ideals upon the altar of
someone who wants to be a false god, where his interests are superior
over everyone else's. That is wrong.
History is watching. We should reject this nominee.
Immigration
Mr. President, somewhere in America today, a father kissed his
children goodbye before leaving to work, a mother boarded an airplane
to attend her father's funeral, a husband drove to his construction
job, a woman walked into an airport believing that they were following
the law of our land. None of them expected to disappear into
our immigration detention system. Yet this is happening all over our
country.
Over the last several months, immigration enforcement has accelerated
dramatically. In June alone, ICE arrested more than 43,000 people--the
highest monthly total in years. People are being arrested outside of
their homes, at airports, at workplaces, near schools, near our
churches, across communities throughout our Nation. And many of them--
most of them--are nonviolent, with no criminal record. Many of them
have lived here for years--many, for decades. Many of them are raising
American children. Some have American grandchildren, American spouses,
and are an integral part of the community. Many of these folks are
working jobs, paying taxes, following the legal process toward
citizenship.
A woman traveling home to Texas for her father's funeral was detained
at an airport while she was pursuing her asylum claim. Two other women,
despite being married to American citizens and already in the legal
process of obtaining permanent residency, were detained.
These are not people that are hiding from the law; these are people
trying to follow it. Yet, instead of helping them complete that
process, our government took them, locked them away from their
families, from the Americans that love them, the communities that
cherish them, the businesses and jobs that sustained those families.
Right now, today in America, roughly 70 percent of the people in
immigration detention--often for-profit private companies--have never
been convicted of a criminal offense--70 percent. This is not what
Donald Trump promised--that he would go after the ``worst of the
worst.'' This is a dragnet.
These, unfortunately, are indiscriminate arrests, not the result of
focused law enforcement. They are the consequence of arbitrary arrest
quotas and no guiding principles of decency and support of a legal
immigration system. It is taking people who are seeking to abide by our
laws and throwing them in prisons for the profits of private companies,
which also are big supporters and contributors to this President.
When numbers become more important than justice, innocent people
become collateral damage. And this doesn't just harm immigrants in our
country or violate our values of decency; it harms all Americans.
Too often, this debate is framed as though immigrants are taking from
our country, that they are takers. Well, the facts tell a different
story. According to the conservative Cato Institute, for more than two
decades, immigrants have contributed more in taxes--way more in taxes--
than they have received in any kind of government benefit, many of
which they are ineligible for. Together, immigrants have generated a
fiscal surplus measured in the trillions of dollars. Undocumented
immigrants alone paid nearly $100 billion in Federal, State, and local
taxes in a single year. They work. They build. They start businesses.
They strengthen our economy. They contribute to Social Security and
Medicare. They help build prosperity for all of America.
Yet this administration wants to punish many of the very people that
are helping to strengthen it, violating the commitment to go after the
dangerous people, to focus our taxpayer resources on getting criminals
off of our street. But no, they are using our taxpayer money to go
after people that have been in our country for years and decades, who
are contributing to it and are working hard to abide by our immigration
laws.
Nowhere is this contradiction more painful than what we are seeing
right now with Haitian immigrants in our country. Earlier this year,
the United Nations described Haiti as ``one of the most complex crises
in . . . recent history.'' Armed gangs control large sections of the
country. Kidnappings are widespread. Sexual violence is used as a
weapon. Thousands upon thousands have been killed. Natural disasters
continue to deepen an already catastrophic humanitarian crisis.
Trump's own State Department gives Haiti its highest travel warning,
level 4; in other words, do not travel to Haiti. Think about that. We
tell American citizens ``It is far too dangerous for you to go to
Haiti,'' and then we tell Haitian families ``We are sending you
there.'' How can both possibly be true? How could a nation of decency
take people with temporary protected status and send them to the very
country our Nation warns us not to go to because of the violence and
destitution? Have we no decency in our policies? If a country is far
too dangerous for an American to step into, how can it be safe enough
for families that are now being forced to go back there?
Temporary protected status exists for precisely this kind of moment.
Congress created it. A Republican President signed it into law. It
recognizes a simple yet profound moral truth: When extraordinary danger
exists, Americans should not force human beings into it.
The values of our country, the values of our collective faiths, the
values of the best of humanity are being violated here. We are a moral
nation, but forcing people here on temporary protected status back into
countries where there is such violence and destitution violates our
morals, our values. It cheapens us all. It is wrong. Yet this
administration has canceled temporary protected status for more than
330,000 Haitians.
Many have lived here for years and years. Many of them already have
had American children in our country. Many of them have married
Americans themselves. They have worked here. They have paid billions in
taxes here. They built businesses here, served communities in some of
the most humble jobs in our hospitals as assistants, helping the ill
and the elderly.
There are thousands that I have come to know are in New Jersey, many
whom I know personally. They are woven into the fabric of our
communities, but now from a callous President they face deportation
into one of the most dangerous places on Earth.
I ask my colleagues: Can we look these families in the eye and
honestly
[[Page S4365]]
say this reflects the best of who we are, this reflects the values of
our faiths?
Most of us here in this body are Christians. Would Jesus send someone
from our Nation into danger, rip them away from their communities? Is
that what our faiths dictate? Is that what our ideals dictate?
Even some Republicans have been raising alarms. Members of the House
voted to extend protections. The Republican Governor of Ohio called
those deportations ``a mistake'' because this is not simply an
immigration debate; it is a moral test.
America has always been strongest when our laws reflected both
security and humanity. These are not conflicting ideals. In fact, they
are interwoven.
When we violate our humanity, we violate our security. We can secure
our borders, and we should. We can enforce our laws, and we must. But
we can also distinguish between those who threaten America and those
who have spent years here in our country strengthening it.
This is not weakness. The Haitians in our community--keeping them
here amidst the crisis in Haiti--it is not weakness; it is wisdom. It
is justice. It is morally right.
It is long past time that we, in Congress, modernize an immigration
system that virtually everyone agrees is broken. I can't tell you the
conversations I have had with Republican colleagues of mine.
The late Lindsey Graham is a great example about how our immigration
laws are so broken, it makes it hard for anyone who wants to follow the
rules to be able to, in any timely way, become a citizen of our
country.
The Cato Institute calls it more likely to win the lottery than it is
to come into our country. This is one of the reasons why our population
is declining.
We need laws that reflect our values, laws that are orderly, laws
that keep us safe and secure, laws that protect the border, laws that
affirm our values.
We can have all of that. Do not listen to the false choice of a
President, who wants to send people back to a human version of hell,
rip people from our communities all in the name of safety and security.
That is a lie.
We must create laws that offer a realistic pathway for people who
have lived, worked, contributed, paid taxes, invested their lives in
this country for decades, especially those with American families and
American children.
The question before us is so much larger than immigration; it is
about whom we are becoming as a society when we turn our back on our
neighbors being thrown in private detention facilities that are
profiting off of their pain, who we are as a nation when we want to rip
people away from their families and their children and send them to
modern-day's hell, who we are as a nation when we take those people
that are good enough to work in our hospitals to take care of our
elderly, but then we want to turn our back on them and let them be
dragged out of our country even though they have been here for years,
followed our laws, and are working toward a pathway to citizenship.
Who are we if we continue down this road that creates false fears,
that spreads lies about immigrants, that turns its very back on the
fundamental precept to love your neighbor?
Well, I still believe in America. I still believe we are strong
enough to create safety and security and to embrace those who love our
Nation and serve her faithfully even though they are not citizens. I
still believe in an America that is big enough and bold enough to
protect its borders and love the stranger.
I still believe in a nation whose immigration laws can affirm our
dignity and decency and not be an assault on it. I still believe in a
nation that honors its faith traditions and knows that we have to love
our neighbor and welcome the stranger, especially when they are fleeing
persecution and hate and violence.
I believe in the highest ideals of our Nation. That is why we have
laws like temporary protected status in the first place. It reflected
the best of us. But I fear this administration is showing the worst of
who we are. I honor Republican think tanks, the Republican Governors
who all have the courage to stand up and say: This is wrong.
We need that kind of chorus of conviction here in the U.S. Senate. I
ask my colleagues to not let this President so violate our collective
values. This is not a right or left issue; it is a right or wrong
issue.
I pray for our Nation. I pray that we live our ideals and don't just
talk about them. I pray that we teach our children whom we are not by
what we say but by what we do.
I pray that in this crisis, we do not allow a President to undermine
decency and grace and send innocent people back to environments where
they will face nightmares and violence.
We can be the America we say we are, but this Chamber must stand up.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Cloture Motion
Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I send a cloture motion to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The cloture motion having been presented under
rule XXII, the Chair directs the clerk to read the motion.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
Cloture Motion
We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the
provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate,
do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to
proceed to Calendar No. 320, H.R. 6500, a bill to extend
duty-free treatment provided with respect to imports from
certain countries in Africa under the African Growth and
Opportunity Act, to extend customs user fees, and for other
purpose.
John Thune, Tim Sheehy, John Barrasso, John Cornyn, John
Hoeven, Mike Crapo, James Lankford, Kevin Cramer, Steve
Daines, Tim Scott of South Carolina, Tom Cotton, Roger
Marshall, Thom Tillis, John R. Curtis, Jon Husted, Pete
Ricketts, Cynthia M. Lummis.
____________________