[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 15]
[Senate]
[Pages 20348-20350]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                   SECURE FENCE ACT OF 2006--Resumed


                             cloture motion

  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Allen). Under the previous order, pursuant 
to rule XXII, the Chair lays before the Senate the pending cloture 
motion, which the clerk will state.
  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 Calendar No. 
     615, H.R. 6061, a bill to establish operational control over 
     the international land and maritime borders of the United 
     States.
         Bill Frist, Lamar Alexander, Richard Burr, Gordon Smith, 
           John Thune, Johnny Isakson, John Cornyn, Judd Gregg, 
           Jim Inhofe, Saxby Chambliss, Sam Brownback, Tom Coburn, 
           Jeff Sessions, Richard Shelby, Craig Thomas, Michael B. 
           Enzi, Lisa Murkowski.

  Mr. KENNEDY. In May, the Senate passed a historic bipartisan bill 
that bolsters national security, ensures economic prosperity and 
protects families. The House passed a very different bill.
  The logical next step would have been to appoint conferees and begin 
negotiating a compromise.
  But, instead of working to get legislation to the President's desk, 
the House Republican leadership frittered away the summer, embarking on 
a political road show featuring 60 cynical onesided hearings, and 
wasting millions of precious taxpayer dollars.
  Repeatedly, the American people have told us that they want our 
immigration system fixed, and fixed now. They know this complex problem 
requires border security, a solution for the 12 million undocumented, 
and a fair temporary worker program for future workers. All security 
experts agree.
  So what does the Republican leadership have to show for its months of 
fist pounding and finger pointing?
  All they have is old and failed plan--a fence bill. It makes for a 
good bumper sticker, but it is not a solution. It is a feel good vote 
that will do nothing but waste $9 billion.
  The fence proposal we have before us: Goes far beyond what Secretary 
Chertoff needs; it doubles the size of the fence we have already 
approved. From 370 miles to 850 miles. It is also expensive. Estimates 
range from $3 million per mile. And it will not work. Fences will not 
stop illegal overstayers--who account for 40-50 percent of current 
undocumented population, or the many who continue to come here to work.
  What the Republican leadership does not seem to get is that 
comprehensive immigration reform is all about security.
  The American people want realistic solutions, not piecemeal feel-good 
measures that will waste billions of precious taxpayer dollars and do 
nothing to correct a serious problem.
  Sacrificing good immigration policy for political expediency and 
hateful rhetoric is not just shameful--it is cowardly.
  Let us be frank. This is about politics not policy.
  I urge my colleagues to choose good policy over political expedience 
and oppose this cloture motion.
  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, every Member of this body recognizes 
that border security is critical to our Nation's security. We can and 
must improve our efforts at the borders and prevent potential 
terrorists from entering our country. I have long supported devoting 
more personnel and resources to border security, and I will continue to 
do so.
  But this bill is a misguided effort to secure our borders. I cannot 
justify pouring billions of Federal dollars into efforts that are not 
likely to be effective.
  Recent Congressional Budget Office estimates indicate that border 
fencing can cost more than $3 million per mile. Under this legislation, 
we would be committing vast resources to an unproven initiative. Adding 
hundreds of miles of fencing along the border will almost certainly not 
stem the flow of people who are willing to risk their lives to come to 
this country.
  Furthermore, there are very serious concerns about the environmental 
impact this type of massive construction project would have on fragile 
ecosystems in border areas. Before we pour precious Federal dollars 
into a massive border fencing system, at the very least we should do a 
thorough analysis of the most effective and fiscally responsible means 
of securing our borders against illegal transit. In fact, S. 2611, the 
Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006, would direct the Attorney 
General, in cooperation with other executive branch officials, to 
conduct such a study on this question. The study would analyze the 
construction of a system of physical barriers along the southern 
international

[[Page 20349]]

land and maritime border, including the necessity, feasibility, and 
impact of such barriers on the surrounding area.
  Another reason that this bill is misguided is that improving our 
border security alone will not stem the tide of people who are willing 
to risk everything to enter this country. According to a recent Cato 
Institute report, the probability of catching an illegal immigrant has 
fallen over the past two decades from 33 percent to 5 percent, despite 
the fact that we have tripled the number of border agents and increased 
the enforcement budget tenfold. It would be fiscally irresponsible and 
self-defeating to devote more and more Federal dollars to border 
security efforts, like this fence, without also creating a realistic 
immigration system to allow people who legitimately want to come to 
this country to go through legal channels to do so.
  That is why I oppose the House ``enforcement only'' bill. That is why 
business groups, labor unions and immigrant's rights groups have all 
come together to demand comprehensive immigration reform. And that is 
why I oppose this bill. We need a comprehensive, pragmatic approach 
that not only strengthens border security, but also brings people out 
of the shadows and ensures that our Government knows who is entering 
this country for legitimate reasons, so we can focus our efforts on 
finding those who want to do us harm. Border security alone is not 
enough. I will vote against cloture on this bill.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I support cloture on H.R. 6061, the Secure 
Fence Act. The sooner the Congress passes this bill, the sooner the 
Congress can put aside the misguided amnesty legislation passed by the 
Senate earlier this year. The American people have listened and 
rejected the call to offer U.S. citizenship to illegal aliens. They 
have said NO to amnesty! Hallelujah!
  Comprehensive immigration reform is a euphemism for amnesty, and I 
oppose it absolutely and unequivocally. I voted against the amnesty 
bill passed by the Senate, and I will continue to vote against amnesty 
as long as I am in the Senate.
  I have seen how amnesties encourage illegal immigration, with the 
amnesties of the 1980s and 1990s corresponding with an unprecedented 
rise in the population of unlawful aliens.
  I have seen how amnesties open the border to terrorists, with the 
perpetrators of terrorist plots against our country taking advantage of 
amnesties to circumvent the regular border and immigration checks.
  I have seen how amnesties afford special rules to some immigrants. 
Amnesty undermines that great and egalitarian American promise that the 
rules will be applied equally and fairly to everyone.
  We are a nation of immigrants to be sure, but that does not mean that 
we are obligated to give away U.S. citizenship. According to 
immigration experts, until 1986, the Congress never granted amnesty to 
any generation of immigrants. The Congress encouraged immigrants to 
learn the Constitutional principles of our Government and the history 
of our country. Immigrants learned English, and tried to assimilate. 
U.S. citizenship was their reward. The Congress did not reward illegal 
aliens with U.S. citizenship.
  Now that this idea of amnesty has been rejected by the Congress, 
perhaps the administration will begin, at long last, to focus its 
efforts on actually reducing the number of illegal aliens already in 
the country. Such an effort will require a significant investment of 
funds to hire law enforcement and border security agents, and to give 
them the resources and equipment they need to do their job. In the 
years immediately after the September 11 attacks, those funds had not 
only been left out of the President's annual budgets but had been 
continuously blocked by the White House in the appropriations process. 
I and others tried to add funds where possible, but not until recently 
did the administration begin to respond to the inadequacies along the 
border. So much more is required and needs to be done.
  The bill before the Senate today is a good bill. It would authorize 
two-layer fencing along the southern border where our security is 
weakest, and set timetables to which the Congress can hold the 
administration. But this bill will amount to little or no protection 
without the resources to implement it. The administration must do more. 
Without its continued support and a committed effort to prevent illegal 
immigration, the protective barrier called for in this bill will amount 
to nothing more than a line drawn in the sands of our porous Southern 
border.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, now we have 4 minutes that can be equally 
divided between those in favor and those in opposition; am I correct?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Let us review where we in the Senate have been on the issue of 
immigration.
  Last May, we passed by 63 votes, with 1 favorable vote missing, a 
comprehensive measure to try to deal with a complex and difficult 
issue. The House of Representatives passed this bill, but they refused 
to meet with the Senate of the United States. The House of 
Representatives held 60 hearings all over the country at taxpayers' 
expense--millions and millions of dollars. What do they come up with? 
After all the pounding and finger-pointing, they came up with an 800-
mile fence.
  Listen to Governor Napolitano: You show me a 50-foot fence, and I 
will show you a 51-foot ladder.
  This is a feel-good bumper-sticker vote. It is not going to work. 
Why? Because half of all the undocumented come here legally. They don't 
come over the fence.
  Do you hear us? This is going to cost $9 billion.
  Listen to what Secretary Chertoff said about this issue. Secretary 
Chertoff said: ``Don't give us old fences. Give us 20th century 
solutions.'' Tom Ridge, the former head of Homeland Security, said the 
same thing.
  This is a waste of money. Let us do what we should have done in the 
first place. Let us sit down with the House, the way this institution 
is supposed to work, rather than just take what is served up by the 
House of Representatives that said take it or leave it. That is what 
they are saying to the Senate.
  We have had a good debate which resulted in a comprehensive measure. 
Let us have a conference with the House. But let us reject this bumper-
sticker solution. It isn't going to work. It is going to be enormously 
costly.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, we know that fencing works. It is a 
proven approach. The San Diego fence has been incredibly successful. 
The illegal entries have fallen from 500,000 to 100,000. Crime in San 
Diego County, the whole county, dropped 56 percent. It is an absolutely 
successful experiment and demonstration of this working.
  The chief of Border Patrol told one of the House hearings that it 
multiplies the capacity of their agents to be effective. There is no 
way individual agents can run up and down the border without some 
barriers in these high-traffic areas.
  Secretary Chertoff asked us explicitly for 800 miles of barriers and 
fencing. He asked for that. We voted for it in May. We voted 83 to 16 
in favor of the fence, and in August we voted 93 to 3 in favor of 
funding. But we haven't gotten there yet.
  This bill is the kind of bill which can allow us to go forward and 
complete what the American people would like to see, and maybe then we 
can have some credibility with the public and we can begin to deal with 
the very important, sensitive issues of comprehensive immigration 
reform which I favor. But I believe the present bill that came through 
the Senate did not meet the required standard. We can do much better.
  We have voted for this. We voted for it at least three times to make 
it a reality. And then we will have some credibility with the American 
people after we do that and then begin to talk comprehensively about 
how to fix an absolutely broken immigration system.

[[Page 20350]]

  I urge support of cloture.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum 
call has been waived.
  The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on 
Calendar No. 615, H.R. 6061, a bill to establish operational control 
over the international land and maritime borders of the United States, 
shall be brought to a close?
  The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. The clerk will call 
the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. McCONNELL. The following Senator was necessarily absent: the 
Senator from Maine (Ms. Snowe).
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 71, nays 28, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 260 Leg.]

                                YEAS--71

     Alexander
     Allard
     Allen
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Bennett
     Biden
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Burr
     Byrd
     Chambliss
     Coburn
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Collins
     Conrad
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     Dayton
     DeMint
     DeWine
     Dole
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Feinstein
     Frist
     Graham
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Johnson
     Kyl
     Landrieu
     Lincoln
     Lott
     Lugar
     Martinez
     McCain
     McConnell
     Mikulski
     Murkowski
     Nelson (FL)
     Nelson (NE)
     Pryor
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith
     Specter
     Stabenow
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Talent
     Thomas
     Thune
     Vitter
     Voinovich
     Warner
     Wyden

                                NAYS--28

     Akaka
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Chafee
     Clinton
     Dodd
     Durbin
     Feingold
     Harkin
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Kennedy
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Menendez
     Murray
     Obama
     Reed
     Reid
     Salazar
     Sarbanes
     Schumer

                             NOT VOTING--1

       
     Snowe
       
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 71, the nays are 
28. Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn having voted in 
the affirmative, the motion is agreed to.
  The clerk will please report the bill.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (H.R. 6061) to establish operational control over 
     the international land and maritime borders of the United 
     States.

  Pending:

       Frist amendment No. 5036, to establish military 
     commissions.
       Frist amendment No. 5037 (to amendment No. 5036), to 
     establish the effective date.
       Motion to commit the bill to the Committee on the 
     Judiciary, with instructions to report back forthwith, with 
     an amendment.
       Frist amendment No. 5038 (to the instructions of the motion 
     to commit H.R. 6061 to the Committee on the Judiciary), to 
     establish military commissions.
       Frist amendment No. 5039 (to the instructions of the motion 
     to commit H.R. 6061 to the Committee on the Judiciary), to 
     establish the effective date.
       Frist amendment No. 5040 (to amendment No. 5039), to amend 
     the effective date.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.

                          ____________________