[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 13]
[Senate]
[Pages 17830-17840]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                  COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM ACT

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the 
Senate will resume consideration of S. 1639, which the clerk will 
report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (S. 1639) to provide for comprehensive immigration 
     reform and for other purposes.

  Pending:

       Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified amendment No. 1934, of 
     a perfecting nature.
       Division VII of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified 
     amendment No. 1934.
       Division VIII of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified 
     amendment No. 1934.
       Division IX of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified 
     amendment No. 1934.
       Division X of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified amendment 
     No. 1934.
       Division XI of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified 
     amendment No. 1934.
       Division XII of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified 
     amendment No. 1934.
       Division XIII of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified 
     amendment No. 1934.
       Division XIV of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified 
     amendment No. 1934.
       Division XV of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified 
     amendment No. 1934.
       Division XVI of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified 
     amendment No. 1934.
       Division XVII of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified 
     amendment No. 1934.
       Division XVIII of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified 
     amendment No. 1934.
       Division XIX of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified 
     amendment No. 1934.
       Division XX of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified 
     amendment No. 1934.
       Division XXI of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified 
     amendment No. 1934.
       Division XXII of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified 
     amendment No. 1934.
       Division XXIII of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified 
     amendment No. 1934.
       Division XXIV of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified 
     amendment No. 1934.
       Division XXV of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified 
     amendment No. 1934.
       Division XXVI of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified 
     amendment No. 1934.
       Division XXVII of Reid (for Kennedy/Specter) modified 
     amendment No. 1934.
       Kennedy Amendment No. 1978 (to Division VII of Reid (for 
     Kennedy/Specter) modified amendment No. 1934), to change the 
     enactment date.

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Massachusetts is 
recognized.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I understand that at the hour of 10:30 we 
will be having the cloture vote on the immigration legislation. Am I 
correct?
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The vote may actually be at 10:50.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Fine. I yield myself 5 minutes.
  Mr. President, this has been a long journey to try and bring our 
broken immigration system and our broken borders to the place where 
this Senate can take action. Today's action is going to be absolutely 
key to whether we will be able to continue and finalize this 
legislation at the end of the week. So today's vote is a critical vote, 
key vote, perhaps the most important vote we have had here on this 
issue over the period of the last 3 years.
  Our Judiciary Committee has been working on this legislation. Senator 
Specter has been a key part of this whole effort. It has been a 
bipartisan effort. Our quest has been a bipartisan effort here on the 
floor of the Senate.
  Those of us who are committed to this issue believe we have an 
important responsibility to try to achieve something. We believe the 
reason for us being here, whether it is from Massachusetts or 
Pennsylvania or from other States, is to deal with the public's 
business, the Nation's business. This is the Nation's business. I think 
outside of the issue of the war in Iraq, this is front and center for 
our country.
  People in my State are concerned and affected by it, and they are in 
other parts of the country as well. We have 900,000 nonnative-born 
individuals in my State of Massachusetts. Of those 900,000, 200,000 are 
undocumented. We have more than 3,000--in the city of Boston--more than 
3,000 small businesses directly responsible for 34,000 jobs, more than 
half a billion dollars in pay and sales taxes in my State by those who 
are born in other countries. They represent probably less than 10 
percent of the State's population, and 17 percent of the job market. 
The workers in our State, 17 percent are nonnative born, a 
demonstration that

[[Page 17831]]

those individuals who have come here to the United States want to work. 
They want to work. They also are men and women of faith. They are men 
and women who care about their families, by the fact that more than $48 
billion is returned every single year to the countries in Central and 
South America.
  They care about their families. They want to work. More likely than 
not, they are all men and women of deep faith and religious belief. 
That is reflected in many of our communities in my State and in travels 
around the country. You see that day in and day out.
  Also they want to be a part of the American dream. We have seen that 
reflected in the total numbers of individuals who have served in the 
Armed Forces of our country. Some 70,000 have served in Iraq and 
Afghanistan, and many have lost their lives. But in a number of 
instances, individuals, the undocumented, have crossed the line in 
terms of immigration, drawn here by the great economic magnet, the 
economic magnet that is on this side of the border that says: Look, we 
need you over here to make the American economy work. We want to pay 
you over here when you are unemployed over here. We will provide you 
the resources so you can look after your family. People have been 
attracted to that magnet. We have them here.
  For those toward the end of this discussion and debate, as we have 
heard on the floor, we know what they are against. We do not know what 
they are for. Time and time again they tell us: We do not like this 
provision; we do not like that provision; we do not want that part of 
it. They ought to be able to explain to the American people what they 
are for. What are they going to do with the 12\1/2\ million who are 
undocumented here? Send them back? Send them back to countries around 
the world, more than $250 billion; buses that would go from Los Angeles 
to New York and back again? Try and find them? Develop a type of 
Gestapo here to seek out these people who are in the shadows? That is 
their alternative? That is their alternative?
  This country and this Senate is better. We have a process that said: 
Look, okay, you are here and undocumented. You are going to have to pay 
a price. We are going to take people who are in the line who have said 
they want to play by the rules. They go and they wait, and you wait and 
you wait and you wait. You pay and pay, and you pay and you pay. You 
pay your fees, you pay your processing fees, your adjustment fees. You 
pay not only for yourself but the other members of the family. You 
demonstrate you are going to learn English, you demonstrate you worked 
here, that you are a good citizen, that you have not had any run-in 
with crime, and then maybe you get on that pathway with a green card, 
and, perhaps, in 15, 18 years you will be able to raise your hand and 
be a citizen here in the United States. This is the issue. Are we going 
to have a constructive and positive resolution of this issue, or are we 
going to be naysayers, bumper sticker sloganeers who say: We are 
against amnesty, or, we are against this bill?
  America deserves better. The issue is too important. Now is the time, 
this is the place. The Senate is the forum where we have to take this 
action.
  I am hopeful that America is watching this and will understand what 
is at stake here. This is an issue and this is a vote of enormous 
importance. We talk of votes here. Some are more important than others. 
A few are of enormous significance and consequence. A few of them are 
going to have a defining impact about what kind of society we are going 
to be in, how we are going to treat each other, whether we have a 
respect for our fellow human beings and our fellow individuals who are 
here in this country, and whether we believe that our greatest days are 
yet to come.
  Are we going to respond to the voices of fear? And that is the issue. 
Are we going to have a positive resolution, a constructive resolution, 
that is going to continue to be shaped as it goes to the House of 
Representatives, shaped there as well by different responsible figures? 
It may have somewhat of a different view. Or are we going to say no, 
no, we have listened to those voices of fear who say: Absolutely not. 
We are going to take the status quo. Every person who votes ``no'' is 
going to know that this situation is going to get worse and worse and 
worse.
  We are going to say that: Oh, yes, sure, we will do something down on 
the border. But you are never going to have the kind of workforce 
enforcement, you are never going to have the kind of absolutely 
essential identification system that any responsible immigration system 
is absolutely required to have.
  This is a vital vote about the future of our country or the past. 
That is going to be the issue in question when the time comes to vote.
  Mr. President, I reserve the remainder of my time.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I yield myself 5 minutes.
  The legislation now pending is the very best that can be done by very 
extensive work on the immigration problems in the United States.
  Last year in the 109th Congress, the Judiciary Committee, which I 
chaired, produced a bill. This year we went to a little different 
procedure and we have structured a bill which is the best that can be 
done as of this moment. It may yet be improved in the balance of the 
amendments yet to be voted upon, if cloture is invoked on this vote 
this morning, a 60-vote tally, obviously very difficult to get to.
  Had I written the bill, it would have been substantially different. I 
would have agreed with Senator Menendez that there ought to be more 
consideration to families. I would have agreed with Senator Dodd that 
we ought to have more parents coming into this country. I would have 
agreed with those who oppose the touchback, which I think is punitive 
and formalistic and not related to anything, necessarily.
  But this is an accommodation. The art of politics is to compromise 
and to accommodate. We have constantly said to the opponents: If you 
have something better, tell us what it is.
  Not only have the opponents not told us what they have in mind for 
something better, but they have refused to come forward and offer any 
amendments and have used Senate procedure to stop others from offering 
amendments. So for hours I sat here as manager of the bill doing 
nothing. That is why we have utilized the unusual procedure we have 
today. Some are complaining that they have not had an opportunity to 
offer amendments but, candidly, it is their own fault. When they had a 
chance to do so, they didn't. Beyond that, they stopped others from 
offering amendments.
  We have the advocates for the immigrants. They have a very strong 
case. What this bill started out to do was to deal with the 12 million 
people who are so-called ``living in the shadows'' in fear. This bill 
does deal with that issue.
  Those who say it doesn't go far enough have a point, but I think they 
lose sight of the core reason the bill is structured, as it is for the 
12 million. It accommodates them in a realistic way and puts them on 
the path to citizenship. That has led many to cry ``amnesty.'' I don't 
think it is amnesty for the reasons that have been enumerated many 
times. But amnesty, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. These 
12 million are going to be here whether we legislate or not. So if it 
is amnesty, to do nothing is to have silent amnesty. They are going to 
stay here. To do nothing is to perpetuate anarchy.
  Those who have argued strenuously and cogently to have border 
protection and employer verification to eliminate the magnet and to 
reimpose the rule of law are right. But they are not going to get the 
core of what they want if no bill is passed. So we ought to come to 
grips with the basic reality that the fundamentals on both sides have 
been realized, not the periphery and not the fringes, but the 
fundamentals.
  We have had some votes which really defy the tradition of the Senate. 
We had the Dorgan amendment early on where many voted against their 
preferences, their policy judgments, to kill the bill. They had a 
position as to what they thought was right. They had expressed it. We 
knew what their policy

[[Page 17832]]

position was. They voted the other way to kill the bill.
  Yesterday, on the Baucus amendment, it was really extraordinary. I 
have been here a while. Twenty-three Senators changed their votes. You 
can tell on the cards, there is a check one way and a cross-off and a 
check the other way. Twenty-three Senators changed their votes. We talk 
about profiles in courage, this is a profile in cynicism. Votes were 
changed in order to defeat the bill, not because they expressed the 
preferences of the Senators. There were colleagues who said how they 
would vote, and then they didn't vote the way they said they were going 
to. I am not going to call them commitments which were breached, but 
that term might be used. It is a little strong to say that a Senator 
broke his word and breached a commitment. Let me simply say that some 
said how they would vote and then didn't. That is an unusual occurrence 
in the Senate.
  It has been a common practice for Senators to vote in favor of 
cloture and then to vote against the bill. That expresses a middle 
ground that the Senator doesn't think there ought to have to be a 
supermajority that is, 60 votes--to carry the bill. But the Senator 
doesn't want to vote for the bill and so expresses himself or herself 
by voting for cloture so the bill can go forward but then votes against 
the bill on the merits. Those who vote against cloture will be 
responsible for killing the bill. They can then vote against the bill 
so that they won't be responsible for passing the bill. Around here, we 
like to avoid being responsible for one thing or another, but if we do 
not have cloture on this bill, the bill is dead. If we have cloture, 
then Senators are not responsible for its passage when they vote 
against it.
  I urge my colleagues to bear that in mind. We pride ourselves in the 
Senate on being courageous. President Kennedy's book as a Senator was 
titled ``Profiles in Courage.'' We have one illustration of that in the 
senior Senator from Arizona, Mr. McCain, who is on the front page of 
the Washington Post today with the reports about his courageous stand 
on immigration costing him votes, perhaps costing him the Republican 
nomination. No one knows for sure, but it isn't helping him any.
  It would be my hope that the Senate would rise to the occasion and 
would not kill this bill because if it is done, it is finished for the 
year. Next year is a Presidential/congressional election. We are off to 
2009 and beyond. Then it will only be worse.
  I leave my colleagues with the essential point that a responsible 
position would be to let the bill go forward. There is another 60-vote 
margin coming on the issue of a budget point of order. Don't be 
responsible for killing the bill by voting against cloture. Then you 
don't have to be responsible for the bill when voting no, and let the 
majority rule but not call for a supermajority on this very critical 
issue.
  I reserve the remainder of my time.
  Mr. KENNEDY. I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from California.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Casey). The Senator from California.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, this is really a very difficult time 
because probably in the 14 years I have been here, there is no more 
important bill than this one. There is no more difficult bill. There is 
no bill that calls upon the courage of every single Senator more than 
this bill. I know what has been happening out there. I know the calls 
that have been made. I know some of the threats that have been made. 
Yet we have a chance in this bill to do the right thing.
  Many people don't understand the bill. They don't understand the 
large amount of the bill that is dedicated to enforcing our borders. 
They don't understand the money that the fees and fines put into the 
process to be able to do what we need to do with respect to 
immigration. They don't understand the reforms that are made in 
employment verification. They also don't understand the threat to our 
national security--that having so many people in this country and not 
knowing who they are, having more people coming into this country every 
day and not knowing who they are--the threat this presents to the 
security of every man, woman, and child.
  This bill is aimed to fix what is broken in our system. I have had 
individual Senators say to me: Well, if the bill was just this part, I 
would vote for it; if the bill was just that part, I would vote for it. 
The point is, this part or that part won't get 60 votes. Only a 
combination of parts to accomplish a broad fix of broken borders, 
broken identification, a totally broken system will get enough votes.
  We are very close to the votes required. I don't know what to say to 
Members who are not yet decided to bring them on board. I agree with 
what Senator Kennedy and Senator Specter have said: If we miss this 
opportunity, there is not likely to be another one in the next few 
years to fix the system. What will that mean? That will mean every year 
700,000 to 800,000 more people will come across our borders unobserved, 
unknown. They will disappear into the shadows. If there is period of 
``do nothing'' for the next 10 years, that will be 7 to 8 million more 
people illegally in the country. If we don't fix our visa overstay 
system, which is in this bill--40 percent of the illegal population are 
visas overstay; many of them don't go home--that will remain unfixed. 
If we don't come up with fraud-proof identification cards, employers 
will never really be able to know whom they employ and whether that 
individual is a legal person. This is an opportunity to fix all of 
that.
  The fixes may not be to everyone's liking, but they are positive. It 
is the most positive immigration bill we have considered yet.
  Additionally, never before in the history of the country is more 
being done to fix our broken borders, to fix interior enforcement, to 
fix employer sanctions. One thing is happening that has turned this 
bill by talk show hosts into something it is not, and that is for those 
people who are opposed, this is an amnesty bill. I don't know how we 
could say more strongly that it is not. I don't know how we could say 
more strongly that what is out there now is a silent amnesty. People 
are here 15, 20, 25 years. They are working, owning property. They now 
have a state of amnesty. This bill reconciles that. This bill changes 
that. This bill prevents it from happening in the future. It is hard 
for me to understand why that doesn't measure big-time with many of our 
colleagues. Apparently, it does not.
  I can only come to the floor to plead: Let us finish this bill. If 
you are concerned about enforcement, Senator Graham's amendment coming 
down the pike next has many very interesting improvements. Give him a 
chance to offer that amendment, then vote no. But I think to cut this 
bill off now is a huge mistake. We are so close. There are still a 
series of amendments to be passed. Please, give them an opportunity 
postcloture. Please vote for cloture.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished 
Senator from Arizona.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
  Mr. KYL. Mr. President, in my last election my constituents sent me a 
couple of clear messages, one of which was do something about illegal 
immigration. In my State, we have a majority of people who are entering 
the country illegally coming across the border from Mexico, creating 
huge environmental problems, law enforcement problems, people 
victimized on both sides, costs to the State, lawlessness literally on 
street corners. The people of my State are saying: What is happening to 
our country when we can't enforce the laws at the border? Are we not a 
sovereign country? They have a point.
  We understand politically that in order for us to enforce the law, we 
have to have an enforceable law. As a result, this bill we have put 
together for the first time creates a strong bipartisan consensus for 
all of the things that are needed to control our border. But it does 
more in two key ways. The reason these other two things are important 
is because a lot of my constituents have said: Why should we believe 
that a new law is going to be enforced when the existing law isn't 
enforced? That is a very good question. Presidents, both

[[Page 17833]]

this administration and the previous administration, and Congresses 
have not done an adequate job of enforcing the law. But it is also true 
that we have two laws that are not very enforceable. We know that 40 
percent of the people who are here illegally have overstayed visas. 
They didn't cross the border illegally. It is very hard to enforce the 
visa overstay laws because they are not adequate. We don't have 
adequate resources, either.
  Secondly, the employee verification system in place today is a joke. 
Everyone knows that. One can use counterfeit driver's licenses and 
Social Security cards, and we all know there are millions of people 
working here illegally though they presented documents to an employer. 
The 1986 bill wrote a very bad provision for employment verification. 
It doesn't work.
  So for those who say, ``Well, let's enforce the law, and then there 
will be the attrition of illegal immigrants and we will get back to a 
good situation,'' the answer is, of course, if you do not have a good 
law to enforce, you cannot work that strategy. The law has to be 
changed. It is very clear that in order to change the law so it can be 
enforceable--both with respect to visa overstayers and at places of 
employment--we are going to have to have a group of people get 
together, Democrats and Republicans, willing to support some things 
that each other wants in order to pass such a law. That is the genesis 
of the bill that is before us.
  I hope my colleagues will recognize that doing nothing is not 
acceptable. It is pretty clear, when we come down to this cloture vote, 
that is going to be very close, that 40 Senators might be able to stop 
the Senate dead in its tracks here, thwarting the will of the majority. 
Those 40 Senators would be people on one side who want it all their way 
and on the other side who want it all their way, thwarting the will of 
the majority, which recognizes that neither side can have it all their 
way but that doing nothing is not acceptable. That will be the result 
if cloture is not invoked.
  The final point I would like to make is there are several amendments 
we should be voting on to improve this legislation. Only by moving 
forward with the cloture vote will we be able to vote on those 
amendments. One of those is an important amendment, a very large 
amendment, which was put together by Senator Graham and myself and 
Senator Martinez and several others which really tries to fill in all 
of the gaps in enforcement, some of which have been pointed out to us 
by our constituents, by critics of the bill, by folks on the talk 
shows, by people who oppose the bill. We have taken a lot of those 
suggestions--many of them are great ideas--and put them into this 
enforcement amendment. It will, for example, make it very difficult for 
a visa overstayer to be able to be here illegally in the future. We are 
going to know when they overstay their visa. We are going to detain 
them until they can be removed from the country. That is just one 
example. So in order to be able to vote on those strong and 
strengthening amendments, we have to invoke cloture, we have to be able 
to proceed.
  There are still two more opportunities for those who want to express 
their opposition to the bill to do so. There will be a budget point of 
order, and there will be the vote on final passage. But surely our 
colleagues would, I hope, respect the will of the majority, which is to 
keep moving to make this bill as good as we possibly can, and then 
everybody has the ability to vote however they want to at the end of 
the day. I hope my colleagues will agree that doing nothing is not an 
option and that we can continue to move the bill forward by supporting 
cloture.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, we have 5 allotted minutes for Senator 
Sessions, and I see he is on the floor.
  I ask the Senator, would you like to take that time now, Senator 
Sessions?
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I understood it was 10 minutes.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I say to the Senator, you have 5 minutes 
from each side. You have 5 from me and 5 from Senator Kennedy.
  I say to the Senator, I was going to yield you 5 minutes now.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I would be pleased to use 5 minutes now. 
I believe some of the other Members I wanted to share time with are 
available and can speak.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I will be pleased to yield 2 minutes to 
the Senator from North Carolina, Mrs. Dole.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Carolina.
  Mrs. DOLE. Mr. President, first of all, I thank Senator Sessions, 
Senator DeMint, and Senator Vitter for their hard work on this matter, 
and other Senators as well.
  Certainly, there is one area in which we have much agreement; that 
is, securing our borders. Clearly, the American people do not have any 
confidence at all in the promises this will be done when there is track 
record of total failure. In 1986, there were 3 million illegal aliens, 
and today, of course, there are 12 million or more. The Government does 
not seem to know how many.
  I have an op-ed piece from the Charlotte Observer. Just quoting from 
1986: This bill will help us provide the immediate relief on the border 
that we need. In my view, it is a good bill. We should all support it, 
be glad that this long controversy has finally been put to rest.
  Well, Chuck Grassley made it very clear in strong points that he was 
wrong in the 1986 vote, that this did not provide the security at the 
border we have been promised again today.
  In 2006, we had the Secure Fence Act, 700 miles of fencing to be 
built. Only 2 miles have been built.
  So my view, my strong view, is it is not just promises, it is proof 
people want. The American people want to see results, control of our 
borders. We need to establish standards or metrics and then show they 
have been achieved--for example, having a significant decrease in the 
number of illegal aliens who cross our border, having a significant 
decrease in those who overstay their visas, a high rate of deporting 
those where courts have said a person needs to be removed from this 
country and deal with contentious provisions at a later date. But these 
are the key issues people are concerned about.
  The first order of business must be that we ensure that the mess we 
are faced with now never, ever occurs again. We should be laser-focused 
on our resources, our energy, and ensuring our borders are secure.
  My staff and I have been meeting with sheriffs across our State. 
Section 287(g), which is law now, provides that these local officials 
can be deputized to enhance the ICE agents. This is very important.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
  Mrs. DOLE. I thank the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I thank Senator Dole and yield 2 minutes 
to the Senator from Tennessee, Mr. Corker.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.
  Mr. CORKER. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Alabama for 
yielding me time.
  I just wish to say I appreciate the efforts of all involved in what 
has happened over the last month. I really do. I have voted three times 
against cloture and will vote for a fourth time today against cloture. 
But at the same time, I really have tried to play a constructive role 
in voting on each amendment based on the merits of that amendment.
  This bill is about a lot of things. Certainly, people have put a lot 
of effort into it--based on compassion, based on trying to solve a 
problem. It also, no doubt, has some more sinister components. I hate 
to say it: cheap labor, party politics, who is going to gain the 
majority. So there are a lot of different things at play here. I think 
we all understand that. But I really do appreciate the efforts of all 
involved.
  Today, this is going to get down to four or five Senators. I 
encourage them to vote against cloture, for this reason: I think this 
bill is not good for America because I believe America has lost

[[Page 17834]]

faith in our Government's ability to do the things it says it will do. 
We have had intelligence gaffs. We have had evolving reasons as to why 
we are involved in military conflicts. We have seen what has happened 
at the local, State, and Federal level on things such as Katrina. We 
have ministers who want to go on mission trips today but who cannot get 
passports renewed. This is about competence. It is about credibility. I 
think Americans feel they are losing their country. They are not losing 
it to people who speak differently or talk differently or are from 
different backgrounds; they are losing it to a government that has 
seemed to not have the competence or the ability to carry out what it 
says it will do.
  I believe this bill is going to fail. What I would urge people to do 
is not what they have said today--and that is, to let it pass--but to 
move, meaning to pass into another time, but approaching it on a more 
modest basis, where we do the things we say we will do and build a 
foundation that will cause the American people to actually have faith 
in this Government.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Obama). The Senator's time has expired.
  Mr. CORKER. I thank the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Tennessee and 
would recognize the Senator from South Carolina, thanking him for his 
leadership. As the Senator from Pennsylvania, Mr. Specter, said, this 
has been a tough battle. I thank Senator DeMint for his courage. I 
yield him 1 minute, I believe.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina.
  Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, I thank the Senator for his leadership.
  Mr. President, this immigration bill has become a war between the 
American people and their Government. The issue now transcends anything 
related to immigration. It is a crisis of confidence between what the 
American people believe our Government is and should be, what it is to 
them now, and what they perceive it to be.
  This vote today is really not about immigration. It is about whether 
we are going to listen to the American people and realize we need to 
proceed more carefully, in a more sensitive manner, and appear to be 
listening to the concerns of the American people.
  The allocation of time, as we approach this vote, is very symbolic of 
where we stand. The supporters of this bill, out of an hour's time, 
have allocated 10 minutes to the opinion of the American people. I 
think we should listen to the American people. I hope all of my 
colleagues will decide not to move ahead with this bill and vote 
against cloture today.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
  Mr. DeMINT. I thank the Chair.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I reserve my 5 minutes remaining.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina.
  Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I ask Senator Specter, may I be 
recognized?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
  Who yields time?
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished 
Senator from South Carolina.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina.
  Mr. GRAHAM. I thank the Chair.
  To my colleagues who have participated in this debate, I think it has 
been a once-in-a-lifetime experience, I hope for all of us, because if 
we did this every week, the Senate would fall apart because this is 
tough politics, there is no question about it.
  I do not pretend to know that I am on the wrong side or the right 
side of the American people. I can tell you what polls say--that once 
you tell people what is in this bill, about border enforcement, 
employer verification, merit-based immigration, the temporary worker 
program, it is 2 to 1 in about every poll I have seen. I guess you can 
get the poll to respond to the way you ask the question.
  What I am trying to do is provide a solution to a problem that 
affects the American people. Here is the formula for this problem to be 
solved: bipartisanship.
  To my friends on this side, if you think you can ignore Democrats, 
good luck. They exist. There are a bunch of them over there. Yes, raise 
your hand if you are a Democrat. Why don't you all leave? Well, they 
are not going away. Now, there are a bunch of us over here. Good luck 
ignoring us.
  I would like to secure the border. How many Democrats would? 
Everybody raises their hand, right? Wouldn't you like to have an 
employer verification system where an employer would know the 
difference between somebody who is illegal and legal?
  Enforce the current law. To my friends who call me endlessly and say, 
``Just enforce the current law, Lindsey,'' well, here is Lindsey's 
response: I have looked at it. It is unenforceable. You can get a job 
in America based on a driver's license and a Social Security card being 
presented. What did all the hijackers on 9/11 have in common? They all 
had fake ID cards. They all had fake driver's licenses. I can get you a 
Social Security card. To my good friend from South Carolina, Jim 
DeMint, we can go to the Jockey Lot in Anderson, and I can get both of 
us a Social Security card by midnight with whatever name you want, 
whatever number you want.
  Until we address that problem, we are never going to solve illegal 
immigration because it is about jobs. Current law is a failure. The 
public should be cynical. Are we helping them when we fail? We are at 
20 percent approval, and we deserve it. We do not deserve our pay 
raise. But who are the 20 percent? What do you like about this 
Congress? I cannot believe there are 20 percent of the American people 
who like what we are doing up here because we are doing nothing but 
talking about what we will not do, and we are playing a game that the 
American people do not understand, like the other side does not exist.
  You are never going to deal with this issue until you embrace the 12 
million. No Democrat is going to let you build a fence and do all the 
things we want to do without addressing the 12 million. That is never 
going to happen.
  I want to address the 12 million. The reason I want to address the 12 
million, it bothers me there are 12 million people here that we do not 
know who they are and what they are up to. I wish they would go away, 
but they are not. It is a problem America has to deal with, and we want 
someone else to do it because we are afraid if we do a plea bargain it 
is amnesty. We are afraid that the people who don't want to deal with 
the 12 million will come and take our jobs away. This is about our 
jobs.
  Well, this is bigger than my job. The 12 million will be dealt with. 
They are not going to be ignored. They will be dealt with firmly and 
fairly eventually. They are not going to be deported. They are not 
going to jail. They can't be wished away. So we need to come together 
in a bipartisan manner and have principled compromise where we deal 
with the 12 million, we deal with broken borders, we get a temporary 
worker program.
  To my Republican friends, remember this day if you vote no. You will 
never, ever have this deal again. There will never be a merit-based 
immigration system such as we have negotiated because President Bush 
has helped us. To my friends on this side who say President Bush would 
sign anything, you don't understand what is going on here. President 
Bush has given us as Republicans things we will never get without him 
being President. We have lost the majority, but we have a good deal 
because we have hung together. A temporary worker program and a merit-
based immigration system is a good deal for this country. If we say no 
today, good luck of ever getting it again.
  The 12 million stay here on our terms. They have to learn English. 
They have to pay fines. They can't be citizens unless they go back and 
start over. This is as good as it is going to get.
  Now, if we lived in a perfect world where the Republicans could write 
this bill, it would be different, and I can assure you, my Democratic 
friends would have written a different bill. All I can

[[Page 17835]]

tell you is, the American people have a low opinion of us because we 
can't seem to do the things we need to do----
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
  Mr. GRAHAM. Because we are too worried about us and not them.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts is recognized.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I understand we have 11\1/2\ minutes; is 
that correct?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.
  Mr. KENNEDY. I yield 4 minutes to the Senator from Colorado and the 
remaining time between the Senator from Illinois and myself.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Colorado is recognized.
  Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I come to the floor this morning to urge 
my colleagues to vote yes on cloture as we bring this debate to a very 
pivotal point.
  As I come to the floor this morning, I am reminded of the millions of 
phone calls and letters that everybody has received in this Chamber. 
Many of those phone calls and those letters, those demonstrations have 
been filled with hate and with venom. They have been filled with hate 
and with venom.
  We are the United States of America because we are able to bring our 
Government together to function on behalf of the people of this 
country. So for all of those who have sent arrows in the direction of 
the profiles in courage who have been working on this issue for the 
last 2 years, I say to them: Remember the prayer of Cesar Chaves of the 
United Farm Workers in which he said: Help us love even those who hate 
us. Help us love even those who hate us so that we can change the 
world--so that we can change the world.
  Much of the venom we have seen around this issue has to do with the 
fact that people are afraid. People are afraid. I ask my colleagues to 
join us in looking forward and not being afraid because what makes 
people afraid today is that we have a system of chaos, a system of 
broken borders, a system of victimization.
  So how do we move forward to create a system of law and order of 
which we in the United States of America can be proud? How do we do 
that? Well, we have done our best. We have put forward a proposal that 
says the porous borders we have in America are not good for America. 
The national security of the United States of America demands--
demands--that we move forward and secure those borders. So we have done 
it in this legislation, and we have included the funding to be able to 
secure those borders.
  Second of all, for more than the last 20, 25 years, what has happened 
is that the United States of America has looked the other way as our 
immigration laws have been broken time after time. So for the first 
time, what we have done with this legislation is we have said we are 
going to enforce the laws. We are going to have tough employer 
sanctions against employers who hire those who are unauthorized to work 
in our country. We are even going to criminalize their conduct. So we 
will enforce the laws of our Nation.
  Thirdly, we take the 12 million undocumented workers who are here in 
America, and we say: You are going to pay a fine. You are going to be 
punished. You are going to learn English. You are going to have to go 
to the back of the line, and then after some time on the average of 11, 
12 years, between 8 and 13 years, if you do all the things we require 
of you, including paying these very high fines and paying all of the 
processing fees required, then at that point in time, you will have an 
opportunity to become a citizen if you so choose.
  To me, that is a commonsense solution to the national security issue 
which is at stake in this debate. It also is a commonsense solution for 
a nation that prides itself in enforcing our laws. We are not like 
other countries around the world that don't enforce our laws, but we 
will be.
  So I say this to my colleagues on the other side: I respect you. I 
respect you for what you do here and for how you bring a civil debate 
to the issues that we deal with every day. But at the end of the day, 
if we don't get this done today with this cloture vote, it is going to 
mean the national security of the United States of America will 
continue to be compromised into the future for who knows how long. It 
will mean we will continue to be a nation that does not enforce our 
laws on immigration within this country, and it will mean we will have 
failed to develop a realistic and honest solution to the 12 million 
undocumented workers who labor in America every day.
  So I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this cloture motion that 
we have coming up.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I believe there is 5 minutes on this 
side.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama is recognized.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I know good people have worked on this 
bill, and they are promoting it as a good step forward on immigration. 
But our own Congressional Budget Office has answered that question. 
They have said if this bill becomes law, we will see only a 13-percent 
reduction in illegal immigration into America, and in the next 20 years 
we will have another 8.7 million illegals in our country. How can that 
be reformed? I submit this would be a disaster.
  The American people, I do not believe, desire to double illegal 
immigration. That is what this bill--legal immigration. That is what 
this bill does.
  Mr. President, I ask that I be notified after I have spoken for 2 
minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator will be notified.
  Mr. SESSIONS. The bill is promoted as providing security, but the 
Border Patrol Association, the former Border Patrol Officers 
Association, two former chairmen, chiefs of Border Patrol of the United 
States, former Assistant Attorney General in charge of immigration and 
security say it will not work, and they are scathing in their criticism 
and steadfastly reject this bill. I believe it will further diminish, 
therefore, the rule of law.
  The procedure used to get us to this point is unprecedented in the 
history of the Senate. It allows the leadership to approve every single 
amendment that gets voted on and gives us only 10 minutes in opposition 
this morning, while the masters of the universe get over 40 minutes, 50 
minutes to promote their side. It is typical of the way this debate has 
gone, and it will breed more cynicism by the public.
  I have just seen a notice this morning from the Sergeant at Arms to 
tell us that the telephone systems here have shut down because of the 
mass phone calls Congress is receiving. A decent respect for the views 
of the American people says let's stop here now. Let's go back to the 
drawing board and come up with a bill that will work.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has used 2 minutes. He has 3 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. SESSIONS. I thank the Chair. I yield 2 minutes to the Senator 
from Louisiana who has been effective and courageous in his advocacy on 
this issue.
  Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, if the Chair could inform me when I have 
used 2 minutes.
  Mr. President, we all stand here on the floor of the Senate and 
regularly acknowledge and even praise the common sense and the wisdom 
of the American people. Well, this vote this morning for each of us is 
about whether you really believe that or whether it is just a cheap 
political line to use.
  The American people get it, and they do have common sense and wisdom 
on this issue. They know repeating the fundamental mistakes of the 1986 
bill, joining a big amnesty with inadequate enforcement, will cause the 
problem to grow and not diminish. They know promising enforcement after 
30 years of broken promises isn't good enough. They know the so-called 
trigger is a joke because if the trigger is never pulled, the Z visas, 
the amnesty happens forever. They know groups like the Congressional 
Budget Office have estimated that this bill, so big on enforcement, 
will only decrease illegal immigration 13 percent and will have another 
8.7 million illegal aliens coming into the country. They know that. 
They do have wisdom and common sense.

[[Page 17836]]

  The question is: Do we or do we decide that Washington knows best? 
This isn't just a vote about immigration. This is a vote about whether 
this body is out of touch, whether this body is arrogant, or whether it 
will respect the true wisdom and common sense of the American people.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama has 1 minute 
remaining.
  Mr. SESSIONS. I yield to the Senator from South Carolina, Mr. DeMint.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina is recognized.
  Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, one of the most encouraging parts about 
this debate--there is a silver lining--is it has reengaged the American 
people and shown us that we are truly a government of the people. They 
have spoken and they have spoken loudly. Our phones have been ringing 
off the hooks. We have received e-mails and letters. People are trying 
to get in touch with us. Even now, they are calling in such numbers 
that it has crashed the telephone system in the Senate.
  My question to the Senate today is: What part of ``no'' don't we 
understand? We need to vote no against cloture and stop this process 
that is alienating the American people from what we do, and then 
enforce the laws that are on the books and prove we are a nation of 
laws and that we will enforce the laws that have been passed by this 
Congress.
  I thank the Chair, and I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 10 seconds remaining.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I wish we had been given more than 10 
minutes, while the other side has been given 40 or 50. I thank the 
Chair and yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
  Mr. KENNEDY. I understand we have 7\1/2\ minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.
  Mr. KENNEDY. I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the Senator from Illinois.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois is recognized.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, in our Nation's history, this Nation of 
immigrants, we have always struggled with this issue. As soon as people 
arrive on this shore, there is a question about how many more can we 
take? What does it mean for our Nation if more people come from strange 
lands who don't speak our language? Yet this diversity has made America 
what it is today. We have sustained this great Nation because we are 
different and because we are accepting and because the people who 
struggle to come to these shores--my mother and her family, the 
families of all of us--brought with them a special quality: a 
determination for a better life and a willingness to take a risk to 
come to America. They brought a willingness to take the hardest, 
toughest jobs to prove the American dream and hope that their children 
will have better. Multiply that by millions and you have the story of 
this great Nation.
  Throughout our history, we have always debated how many more we can 
take. That debate comes to a head this morning in just a few minutes. 
We will have a chance on the Senate floor to decide whether we step 
forward.
  I have heard the voices against this saying: Not this bill. We can 
surely do better. We have worked hard on this bill. We have made 
compromises. There are parts of it which I detest and parts which I 
embrace, and that is the nature of compromise and cooperation. I thank 
all of those who have crafted it and put it together.
  But I want to tell my colleagues what is at stake is very basic and 
fundamental as to who we are as a nation. Outside this Chamber, outside 
this congressional debate, you have heard the voices. Some of them are 
dark and ugly. They are not the voices of America, a hopeful nation 
that understands we can be a nation of laws, and with diversity we can 
grow in this world in the 21st century. No, these are voices of 
exclusion, people who want to keep those people out, people who want 
those people to go away. That is not America. That isn't what we are 
about as a nation. That isn't what distinguished us in the world. What 
distinguished us is we can stand up--Black, White, and brown, from all 
across this world--and make a nation. We have done it for over 200 
years. We can do it again. Those who argue this diversity will destroy 
us don't understand the core values of this country.
  I beg my colleagues this morning, even if you disagree with this 
bill, don't end this debate. Give us a chance to continue this debate 
and bring this to a conclusion and a vote. Give us this procedural vote 
that is coming up so we can continue this debate. If at the end of the 
day we step back and say we are surrendering to these negative voices 
across America, the Senate can't rise to the occasion with an important 
bill, it won't speak well of the Senate. There are those of us 
entrusted with the responsibility to serve in this place.
  Let us say to people across America that we are going to have strong 
borders, we are going to enforce the law in the workplace, we are going 
to have rules that say to those who are here illegally you can only 
stay if you meet the strictest requirements. I think that is a 
reasonable standard, a reasonable compromise in the greatest tradition 
of America.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts is recognized.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask to be notified when I have 30 
seconds remaining.
  We are called today by the ancients, the Founders of this Republic. 
Are we going to form a more perfect union? It was in this Chamber a 
number of years ago that we knocked down the great walls of 
discrimination on the basis of race, that we knocked down the walls of 
discrimination on the basis of religion. We knocked them down regarding 
national origin, we knocked them down with regard to gender, we knocked 
them down with regard to disability. Here in this Senate we were part 
of the march for progress.
  Today, we are called on again in that exact same way. This issue is 
of the historical and momentous importance that those judgments and 
those decisions were. When the Senate was called upon, it brought out 
its best instincts, values, and its best traditions. We saw this Nation 
move forward. Who among us would retreat on any of those commitments? 
Who among us would say no to that great march for progress that we had 
in this Nation?
  The question is: Is it alive? Is it continuing? Is it ongoing? Those 
who vote ``aye'' say it is ongoing, that we are continuing that march 
toward progress.
  Year after year, we have had broken borders. Year after year, we have 
the exploitation of workers. Year after year, we see people who live in 
fear within our own borders of the United States of America. This is 
the opportunity to change it. Now is the time. Now is the time to 
secure our borders. Now is the time to deal with the national security 
issue. Now is the time to resume our commitment to family values, to 
people who want to work hard, men and women of faith, people who care 
about this country and want to be part of the American dream, who have 
seen their sons and daughters, in many instances, fight and lose their 
lives in Iraq and Afghanistan. That is the challenge.
  Now is the time. This is the place. This bill is strong. It is fair 
and practical. Today, my friends, we have the choice: Are we going to 
vote for our hopes, or are we going to vote for our fears? Are we going 
to vote for our future, or are we going to vote for our past?
  This is the place. Now is the time. This is the vote. Vote ``aye'' 
for America's future.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania is recognized.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, let me first compliment the distinguished 
Senator from Massachusetts.
  I yield 2 minutes to the Senator from Florida.
  Mr. MARTINEZ. Mr. President, I have been involved deeply in this 
debate that we have had over a couple of years. It comes to a close in 
the next

[[Page 17837]]

day or so in the Senate. We have an opportunity to move forward, to 
move the debate on, and to have an opportunity for the House of 
Representatives to then add their measure of influence upon what this 
bill should be about. We should not simply say the bill isn't good 
enough so we are going to do nothing.
  For those who find criticism with the bill, it is much easier to tear 
down than it is to build. We have crafted a bill over months of 
discussions and negotiations, which does a tremendous amount to end the 
illegality, secure the border, to ensure that we have the mechanisms to 
enforce an employment verification system so we don't have any more 
illegal workers. We do a measure of justice to those who have been here 
and worked and made this country their home for, in many instances, two 
decades.
  The fact is, for those who simply say do nothing, they have a measure 
of responsibility to what comes next. What comes next is a continuation 
of the illegal system. To say simply ``enforce the law,'' well, the 
current laws aren't good enough to be enforced. They do not have the 
enforcement mechanisms necessary to ensure that we do have workplace 
enforcement, which at the end of the day is the most important measure 
we can have.
  A lot has been said about the cost to our society of illegal 
immigrants being legalized. The CBO, which we trust on these issues, 
has said--this is the nonpartisan congressional budget office--they 
find that the new Federal revenue from taxes, penalties, and fees under 
this bipartisan immigration bill will more than offset the cost of 
setting up the new immigration system and the cost of any Federal 
benefit temporary workers, Z visa holders, and future legal immigrants 
under the bill would receive.
  I thank the Senator for yielding me some time. I simply say that it 
has been a pleasure to work with those who have committed themselves to 
do something about the problem, and not simply say what is imperfect 
about the solution but to find a solution to this difficult problem.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, the Senator from Florida has such a 
background, being an immigrant himself, and I think our cause would be 
well served if he took another 3 minutes.
  Mr. MARTINEZ. I thank the Senator.
  Let me touch on that issue. As an immigrant to America, I understand 
what it means to live the American dream. I had the opportunity to come 
to this country as a 15-year-old child, not speaking the language or 
understanding this culture; yet the embrace that America gives those of 
us who are fortunate enough to come to these shores and make America 
our home made me an American.
  Many out there today fear that immigrants don't want to assimilate. 
The fact is--and I have said this before--immigrants come to America 
not to change this country but to be changed by this country. That was 
my experience. I think it is the experience that has been repeated to 
the over 200-year history of this Nation as immigrants have come to 
these shores, and America has had the magic that it performs on those 
of us who come here to become Americans to then make a contribution, as 
I hope I am making today by serving in the Senate.
  The fact is, this is a divisive issue, but I believe it will bind and 
heal our country if we deal with it. Unfortunately, to do nothing will 
continue this festering debate in our country that is so divisive and, 
at times, so ugly. Our country is better than that. I think our country 
has the resourcefulness and the strength of culture to ensure that we 
not fear they want to change America, but that we change them to be the 
Americans that we hope all of us are and can be.
  I thank the Senator for the additional time. This is something in 
which I have invested my heart and soul because I believe it to be so 
right for our country. This isn't about the 12 million immigrants. This 
is about what that will do to ensure that America continues to be the 
place it has been for more than 200 years, as a beacon of liberty, the 
``shining city on a hill'' that President Ronald Reagan spoke of. We 
have to continue that tradition and welcome more people into that 
tradition by allowing them to be legal citizens, legalize their status, 
while we make it clear that the game is up, and from now on immigration 
into America will only be legal and not illegal, as it has been for 
more than two decades.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I compliment the Senator from Florida for 
his statements. Had we more time, all of us could tell our own stories. 
Mine involves two immigrant parents. My father came here at 18, in 
1911, and contributed to this country. My mother came with her family 
at the age of 6, in 1906, and contributed to this country. I thank the 
Senator from Florida, Senator Martinez, who has a special story to tell 
because he himself is an immigrant and is a great testament to what we 
are trying to accomplish with this bill.
  I yield 3 minutes to the Senator from Arizona, who has made such a 
unique contribution to this bill, coming from a border State and facing 
irate calls, not that they are necessarily representative of all of 
Arizona. He said he learned some new words.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania doesn't have 3 
minutes. He has 30 seconds. The Senator from Massachusetts has 1\1/2\ 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. KENNEDY. I yield that time to the Senator.
  Mr. SPECTER. I have 10 minutes 30 seconds because I have been 
allotted the leader time. I yield him 3 minutes.
  Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I can say this in about 90 seconds. The 
Senator from Pennsylvania made the point. It is a sad commentary in 
America today that many Americans have lost faith in their Government. 
The only group that has poll numbers less than the President these days 
is the Congress. Americans don't believe their Government is 
representing them and acting on their behalf. The polls show it.
  On one of the most critical issues of our day, we will not restore 
that confidence if we fail to act again. The only way we can restore 
that confidence is by acting. Skepticism is not a reason for inaction. 
For those who say, well, let's enforce our laws, I remind them that 
some of our laws are unenforceable. My conservative friends are the 
first to point out that the 1986 law is not an effective law. It is 
unenforceable. Until we change it, we are not going to be able to 
enforce the law. That is why it is time for us to return to the rule of 
law in America. By returning to the rule of law, we can restore that 
confidence that is so critical for the American people to have in their 
Government.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania is recognized.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, how much time remains?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 9 minutes.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, we have heard from the objectors what the 
American people think. I am not sure they have standing to represent 
the American people. We heard the junior Senator from South Carolina 
speak as to his interpretation of what the American people think. But 
we heard the senior Senator from South Carolina stand in firm support 
of this legislation--the Senator representing South Carolina, as well 
as the other Senator from South Carolina.
  We know as a matter of practice that the callers and the e-mailers 
are characteristically naysayers. You hear a lot more from people who 
object than you do from people who are in favor. We know that the 
majority of America is the silent majority. From my own soundings, what 
I hear on the train when I come back and forth from Pennsylvania, what 
I hear in the restaurants, on the streets, and in the fitness club is 
to proceed, try to find a way to improve a very serious situation in 
immigration.
  No one of us is able to speak for the American people. We hear 
different voices at different times. I know one thing with relative 
certainty, and that is you cannot tell what the American people think 
simply by those who object and those who call. We do not run America in 
a representative democracy, in a republic, by public opinion

[[Page 17838]]

polls. If we did, we would take the public opinion poll and we could 
dispense with all of the fat salaries that Members of Congress get. We 
could dispense with paying 535 people and take a public opinion poll 
and sign it into law.
  I think the most erudite statement on this particular issue was 
uttered by a distinguished British philosopher politician, named Edmund 
Burke, in a speech to the electorate of Bristol on November 3, 1774, 
when he made this famous statement:

       Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but 
     his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he 
     sacrifices it to your opinion.

  Now, that is not to say in a representative democracy we ought to not 
consider the opinions of our constituents, but I think Edmund Burke was 
right more than 200 years ago when he talked about our duty in owing 
our constituents our best judgment.
  What is our best judgment and how have we come to it? We have been 
working on immigration a long time, and we saw the failures of the 1986 
legislation. Because the 1986 legislation failed doesn't mean we cannot 
correct the problem. Things are very different today than they were in 
1986. For one thing, we now have a foolproof method of determining 
whether an individual is legal or illegal. So now we can hold employers 
responsible not to hire illegal immigrants. We can take away the magnet 
of work in this country for those who are not here legally.
  We have lost sight I think, of the very fundamental purpose as to 
what we are trying to accomplish through legislation to reform 
immigration.
  We are trying to secure our borders. This bill goes a long way to 
securing the borders with fencing, with automobile blocks, with more 
Border Patrol. The entire 2,000-mile plus of the border will be more 
secure. It can't be perfectly secured, and that is why we have employer 
verification which, as I say, is now foolproof. Then when we deal with 
the immigrants, we are trying to deal with the 12 million undocumented 
immigrants. Those who would like more--I said earlier that if I had my 
choice, I would agree with Senator Menendez, that I would have more 
family unification. I would agree with Senator Dodd that I would have 
more visas for parents. But this legislation is crafted by compromise, 
and that is the art of politics--the compromise. So it is the best bill 
that we can structure and come forward with.
  If we do not legislate now, we will not legislate later this year 
when our calendar is crowded with Iraq and appropriations bills and 
patent reform, et cetera. We are then into 2008 and an election year 
for President and Congress, and it will be pushed over to 2009. 
Circumstances will not be better then, they will be worse.
  We have a very frequent practice, as we all know, for Senators to 
vote in favor of cloture, and then to vote against the bill. That is an 
expression of policy judgment not to hold a piece of legislation to a 
60-vote supermajority level. We do not have an issue of freedom of 
religion. We do not have an issue of freedom of speech. We have a 
public policy question where in good conscience Senators can say: I am 
opposed to the legislation, but I do not think it ought to be held to a 
60-vote supermajority.
  If we do not invoke cloture, this bill is dead. A vote against 
cloture is a vote to kill the bill. A Senator may vote for cloture and 
then express himself in opposition to the bill by voting against the 
bill.
  For those who did not hear an earlier statement I made, I repeat, we 
had the unusual situation on the Dorgan amendment where Senators did 
not vote their judgment on public policy but voted against their own 
judgment to kill the legislation.
  We have a tally sheet, those of us who work in the Senate, showing 
how Senators voted. And on the Baucus amendment yesterday, we had the 
extraordinary situation of 23 vote changes. You can tell the vote 
change because there is a mark on one side, it is crossed off, and the 
mark then appears on the other side.
  I suggest to my colleagues that we had more cynical maneuvering on 
the Baucus vote, which is characteristic of the maneuvering throughout 
the text of this legislation, and that what this body ought to do is 
take the famous words of President John F. Kennedy when he served in 
this body, to exercise a little courage, a profile in courage as 
opposed to what appears to be a profile in cynicism.
  The essence of it is, Senators can vote for cloture not to kill the 
bill, and then vote against the bill and exercise their right to do 
that and still allow this bill to go forward where it may yet be 
improved.
  Mr. President, I see my time is just about to expire. How much time 
remains?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is 20 seconds remaining.
  Mr. SPECTER. I yield back the remainder of my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader is recognized.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, is immigration a problem? Of course, it is. 
But is immigration a problem that is limited to Texas, Arizona, 
California, the border States? No. Is immigration a problem only for 
big cities, such as San Antonio, New York, Chicago, L.A.? No. 
Immigration is a problem all over America.
  As people know, I am from Searchlight, NV, a little town I was born 
in and the town where I lived. It is 60 miles southeast of Las Vegas in 
the southern tip of the State. Is immigration something people talk 
about in Searchlight? Of course, it is.
  Take yesterday. I got back to my office, and there was a call from 
Tommy. I am not going to give his last name for fear somebody will look 
him up. Tommy called me--and I do have his last name--and he said: I 
have a friend here who is from Mexico, has been here quite a long time. 
What is this immigration bill you are working on going to do for him? 
Should I be in favor of it?
  Yes, Tommy, you should be because your friend will no longer have to 
be afraid of being arrested and deported. This bill will allow him to 
come out of the shadows.
  The same day, yesterday, I received my mail from Searchlight. 
Somebody sends me my mail that comes addressed to me in Searchlight. A 
letter was addressed to me and said, among other things: You probably 
should go under the witness protection program because of your work on 
this immigration issue.
  That is from Searchlight, NV. This doesn't take into consideration 
the letters and the calls my offices in Reno, Las Vegas, and here in 
Washington get filled with hate. I have, of course, turned the letter 
that I got from Searchlight over to the Capitol Police.
  This situation is a problem not just in the border States and big 
cities, it is a problem all over America.
  We are said to be the greatest deliberative body in the world. 
Shouldn't we do something positive regarding an issue that affects 
everybody in America, immigration? Some say it is the country's biggest 
problem. While that may be debatable, it is a significant problem, one 
of the top two or three problems facing us, and the problem is not 
going to go away. Is it right to wait until there is a new President? 
Should we wait until we get a new Congress? Of course not. Talk radio 
has had a field day, these generators of simplicity.
  I want everyone to know, and I want the record spread, I do not 
believe anyone who is a Senator who votes against this motion to 
proceed is filled with prejudice, with hatred, with venom, as we get in 
our phone calls and our mail. I don't believe that. But I do believe we 
have an issue before us that we must resolve.
  My family has been enriched by immigration. My father-in-law, Earl 
Gould, came to America from Russia when he was a little boy. When he 
came here his name was Israel Goldfarb. He assumed the name Earl Gould. 
When I met my wife, her name was Landra Gould.
  I had the opportunity to talk with my father-in-law many times. Every 
one of his siblings who came to America had a different name. They all 
changed their name in this great melting pot.
  My father-in-law died as a young man--he was 52 years old--from 
leukemia. I think of him often. My wife is

[[Page 17839]]

an only child. I think of him often for the kindness that he showed me. 
This ring I wear he gave to me on his death bed. This watch that I wear 
he gave to me. When he was sick and knew he was going to die, he and my 
mother-in-law took a trip to the Middle East and brought me back this 
watch. They didn't have money to buy watches for me, but they bought a 
watch for me. I still wear the watch.
  In this great melting pot we have called America, of which I am a 
part, my five children are eligible for Israeli citizenship because, 
with the Jewish tradition, lineage is with the mother, not the father. 
My children proudly know this.
  My family has been enriched as a result of immigration. I knew my 
grandmother. I talked with her lots of times. As a boy, I listened to 
her stories. I talked with her. I can still hear her voice--oh, we had 
a grand time. That is how she talked. She was born in Katherine's 
Cross, England, and came over here as a girl, married my grandfather, 
had eight children, all of them raised in Searchlight, NV.
  Those are two examples of what immigration is all about, two examples 
of what it has done to Harry Reid.
  My skin is real white. We have African Americans. The Presiding 
Officer is of African-American ancestry. In the back of the room--we 
don't even have to look at the back of the room--we have Hispanics. But 
my skin is American skin, just as the Presiding Officer, just as 
Senator Salazar.
  What is immigration all about? A number of years ago, one of 
America's great journalists, James Fallows, wrote a book called ``More 
Like Us.'' The thesis in this book was that everyone was saying we 
should be more like Japan.
  Japan was at the zenith of its height and power, and we were in the 
doldrums economically. Everyone said we should be more like Japan.
  James Fallows wrote this book, ``More Like Us,'' and he said: No, we 
should be more like us, like America, and the No. 1 issue he talked 
about being different from Japan, our strength, is immigration. I 
testify that is true; that is the strength of this great country.
  Today in America we have a problem with immigration. We have porous 
borders that need to be fixed. We are Senators, I repeat, Members of 
the greatest deliberative body in the history of the world. With the 
honor of our office comes enormous responsibility. We must resist the 
ever-present temptation to do what is expedient at the expense of what 
is right. When short-term gain diverges from long-term good, we must 
choose the good. This is our challenge today.
  I ask every one of my colleagues, Democrats and Republicans, not to 
shrink from this issue, to support us moving forward on this 
legislation for the good of our country, the greatness of our country.
  There are 100 of us. If each one of us were given a few days to draft 
an immigration bill. We probably could do a better job than what has 
been done with this bill, in our own minds. But some of the greatest 
legislative minds in this body have worked long and hard to come up 
with this bill. Perfect? No. Good? Yes.
  I hope we can do the right thing and move this legislation forward. I 
am not here to tell my colleagues this legislation is the greatest 
thing that ever came along, but it is something that is badly needed, 
and we need to continue this process.
  Mr. President, there is $4.4 billion for border security. Is it going 
to help? Oh, it will help a lot. There are 370 miles of fencing, which 
we authorized and, of course, have done nothing about; 300 miles of 
vehicle barriers; 20,000 new Border Patrol agents; more than 100 
ground-based radar and camera towers; and 31,500 detention beds.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, under the UC, I think we are well passed 
the time the leader had, and this side only received 10 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The leader has the floor. The majority leader 
has the floor.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I would say this, 31,500 detention beds. One 
of the problems we have----
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, point of order. The unanimous consent 
gave the leader 12 minutes. It is now about 12 or 15. Does that 
override the leader's time?
  Mr. REID. It is my understanding in the order----
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair always allows some latitude to the 
two leaders. He is currently 1 minute over time.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, it is my understanding of the order of the 
presenters that Senator McConnell and I had 10 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is true.
  Mr. REID. Ten minutes was given to the distinguished Republican 
manager of the bill, and I now am using my leader's time that was not 
in the order.
  I would also say to my friend from Alabama that I would never rudely 
interrupt him whenever he is giving a speech. I would never do that, 
and I wish he hadn't done that, but I will continue.
  Mr. President, 31,500 new detention beds. In Las Vegas, when someone 
is picked up on an immigration violation, there is no place to put 
them. That is what this legislation does, actual money--not authorizing 
money but actual money. That is important.
  It creates a mandatory employer verification system, which is so 
important, and a pathway to legalization for 12 million people, like my 
friend Tommy from Searchlight, NV. What do they do? They work, they pay 
taxes, they learn English, they stay out of trouble, and they pay fines 
and penalties. That is important.
  AgJOBS. The DREAM Act. This legislation is important. It has come 
about as a result of a lot of hard work. For example, we have had 36 
hearings, 6 days of committee action, 59 committee amendments, 21 days 
of Senate debate, and 92 Senate floor amendments.
  I know the vote for everyone here today is a difficult vote. For some 
of us, it may be the most difficult of our careers. There is no perfect 
answer to this problem of immigration, but there are two paths. One 
path is diversion and negativity, while the other embraces hope. One 
path embraces exclusion, the other embraces the American dream. One 
path embraces the status quo, the other pragmatism. Democrats and 
Republicans alike, let us keep hope alive, let us keep the American 
dream alive, let us keep pragmatism alive and well here in the Senate.
  I ask you to join on the path of hope, a courageous path, a path that 
President Bush, Leader McConnell, and I have chosen, a bipartisan path 
to legislative hope. That is what this vote of cloture is all about. 
Voting for cloture on this imperfect bill will make our union a little 
more perfect.


                             Cloture Motion

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order and 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. 
     208, S. 1639, Immigration.

         Ted Kennedy, Russell D. Feingold, Daniel K. Inouye, Tom 
           Carper, Sheldon Whitehouse, Pat Leahy, Richard J. 
           Durbin, Benjamin L. Cardin, Ken Salazar, Frank L. 
           Lautenberg, Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, John 
           Kerry, Charles Schumer, Ben Nelson, B.A. Mikulski, 
           Harry Reid.

  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 S. 
1639, the bill to provide for comprehensive immigration reform, and for 
other purposes, 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. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. 
Johnson) is necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Brown). Are there any other Senators in 
the Chamber desiring to vote?

[[Page 17840]]

  The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 46, nays 53, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 235 Leg.]

                                YEAS--46

     Akaka
     Bennett
     Biden
     Boxer
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Clinton
     Conrad
     Craig
     Dodd
     Durbin
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Graham
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Inouye
     Kennedy
     Kerry
     Klobuchar
     Kohl
     Kyl
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Lott
     Lugar
     Martinez
     McCain
     Menendez
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Obama
     Reed
     Reid
     Salazar
     Schumer
     Snowe
     Specter
     Whitehouse
     Wyden

                                NAYS--53

     Alexander
     Allard
     Barrasso
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Brown
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burr
     Byrd
     Chambliss
     Coburn
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Collins
     Corker
     Cornyn
     Crapo
     DeMint
     Dole
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Grassley
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Landrieu
     McCaskill
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Nelson (NE)
     Pryor
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Sanders
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith
     Stabenow
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Tester
     Thune
     Vitter
     Voinovich
     Warner
     Webb

                             NOT VOTING--1

       
     Johnson
       
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote the yeas are 46, the nays are 53. 
Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn not having voted in 
the affirmative, the motion is rejected.
  The majority leader is recognized.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, the vote has been cast. As I told a number 
of my Republican friends, even though the vote is disheartening to me 
in many ways, I think as a result of this legislative work we have done 
in the last several months on this legislation, there have been 
friendships developed that were not there before, trust initiated that 
did not exist before. I say to my friends, Democrats and Republicans, 
this is a legislative issue. It will come back; it is only a question 
of when. We are only 6 months into this Congress. We have so much to 
do.
  Hopefully, this lesson we have all learned will be one where we 
recognize we have to work more closely together. I hope we can do that. 
I say to all of you, thank you very much for your patience--the phone 
calls I have made; if I twisted arms, it was not very often. I so 
appreciate--I think I speak for all of us--being able to be part of 
this great Senate where we are able to participate in decisions such as 
this.

                          ____________________