[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 15]
[Senate]
[Pages 22932-22934]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                  RECOGNITION OF THE REPUBLICAN LEADER

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Republican leader.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, we will soon be voting on two 
consequential and contentious matters, the DREAM Act and repeal of the 
legislation concerning the Defense Department's don't ask, don't tell 
policy. As our ranking member on one of the two committees of 
jurisdiction recently made clear, the Democratic majority in the Senate 
is again depriving the American people of the right to have their 
concerns addressed through debate on amendments by depriving the 
minority of its right to offer amendments.
  When Democrats were in the minority, my good friend, the majority 
leader, said: This is a ``very bad practice,'' and it ``runs against 
the basic nature of the Senate.'' In fact, he suggested we should not 
shut off debate ``before any amendments had been offered.''
  With back-to-back blockage of amendments on both the DREAM Act and 
legislation repealing don't ask, don't tell, the current majority has 
set a dubious record by denying the minority its right to amendment a 
total of 43 times. Let me say that again. The current majority has set 
a dubious record by denying the minority its right to offer amendments 
a total of 43 times.
  To put that in perspective, in his 4 years as the majority leader, 
Senator Frist did this 15 times. The current Senate majority in the 
same amount of time has done it three times--three times--as often. In 
fact, the current majority has blocked the minority from offering 
amendments more often than the last six majority leaders combined. The 
current majority has blocked the minority from offering amendments more 
often than the last six majority leaders combined.

[[Page 22933]]

  The danger of following this practice is underscored by the flawed 
process used on the very measures before us now. The DREAM Act the 
Senate will vote on today has never had a Senate hearing. In fact, it 
has not had any Senate committee action in 7 years. But, of course, 
this is a House bill, and the legislative record there is more sparse 
still. The House, similar to the Senate, has never had a legislative 
hearing on the DREAM Act, and it has never had a markup there either. 
Now the Senate majority is preventing their colleagues from addressing 
the concerns of the American people by shutting off the ability to 
offer any amendments on the floor.
  So, in sum, there has never been an amendment offered to the DREAM 
Act at either the committee or floor stage in either House of Congress 
since President Bush's first term.
  I guess our Democratic colleagues believe this bill is so perfect it 
doesn't need any amendments whatsoever--just a few last-minute rewrites 
during a lameduck session. I don't think that is what the American 
people believe.
  In regard to the ill-conceived effort to repeal the military policy 
on don't ask, don't tell, the majority leader has insisted on pressing 
forward with this effort, despite the fact that the ranking member of 
the Armed Services Committee has established the need for additional 
hearings. The All-Volunteer Force has had many successes, but has this 
body become so alienated from the enlisted men and women in uniform 
that liberal interest groups have more influence over military 
personnel policy than the senior enlisted leaders of the Army and 
Marine Corps who were denied the opportunity to testify?
  This repeal will be rushed through, despite the fact that it is 
concerning to those in Army combat arms units, and 58 percent of those 
in Marine Corps combat units believe repeal will be harmful to unit 
readiness. Should we ignore the volunteers charged with the most 
difficult missions in our military, combat with the enemy? I think not.
  Democrats will deny the opportunity to amend the bill to require the 
service chiefs to certify that this repeal will not harm combat 
readiness, although they are responsible for training the force. Why 
would anyone oppose this change or even the opportunity to vote on this 
change?
  This is harmful during a time of war and an irresponsible manner in 
which to change policies that the Commandant of the Marine Corps has 
actually stated could risk lives.
  I am going to recommend to my colleagues to heed the advice of my 
friend from Nevada, which he gave a few years ago, and not vote to shut 
down the debate and amendment process for these bills, at least until 
the minority is allowed to offer, debate, and vote on a limited number 
of amendments, and the Senate is allowed to be the Senate once again.
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority leader.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I will use leader time.
  I say to the people in the Senate and the American public, to hear my 
friend, the distinguished Republican leader, talk about our having done 
things procedurally brings a big yawn to the American people. Everyone 
knows how we have been stymied, stopped, and stunned by the procedural 
roadblocks of this Republican minority. So we are where we are today. 
No. 1, we are nearing the end of this congressional session. There is a 
continuing resolution that has been prepared by Senator Inouye and 
Senator Cochran. It has some things I don't like, but it has been done 
because we have to do this, and we will finish that in the immediate 
future.
  I am going to speak just briefly on don't ask, don't tell. But to 
suggest there haven't been adequate hearings on this is simply 
nonsensical. Senator Levin has held 2 days of hearings in the last 30 
days. There have been hearings held, reports done by the military. My 
Republican friends have said: Well, this is something we probably 
should do, but why don't we have a study by the military and see what 
the Pentagon thinks. They did that. More than 70 percent of people who 
have served in the Armed Forces believe it doesn't matter at all.
  This is exemplified in a story that appears in the Las Vegas Sun 
newspaper today, and I will just read two paragraphs from the story:

       The Pentagon's report is done, and it concluded that 
     repealing the law would do little to affect troop readiness. 
     In fact, most of the troops interviewed for the report 
     indicated they didn't think it would be a problem. The 
     majority of them said they had served with someone who they 
     believed to be gay or lesbian and it didn't bother them or 
     affect their units' effectiveness.

  Mr. President, listen to this. For example, the report quotes a 
special operations soldier, who said, ``We have a gay guy in the unit. 
He's big, he's mean, and he kills lots of bad guys. No one cares that 
he's gay.'' That says it all. As Barry Goldwater said, you don't have 
to be straight to shoot straight.
  Mr. President, the DREAM Act. I first must say to everybody within 
the sound of my voice that I came to Washington in 1982 to serve in the 
House of Representatives. One of the people who came in that large 
Democratic class we had was Dick Durbin from Illinois. I have gotten to 
know him extremely well. He is very good. We all know he has the 
ability to express himself extremely well. I have known him for all 
these 28 years. We have worked very closely together. He is now the 
assistant leader of the Senate. I have never known him to feel so 
strongly about an issue as he does this DREAM Act. He worked on it for 
more than a decade. He has shed tears while talking to me about some of 
the people with whom he visits. We saw the emotion he felt here today. 
I so admire and appreciate him for the work he has done.
  I am committed to passing the DREAM Act. As we work toward a 
comprehensive approach to reform our country's broken immigration 
policy, one thing we can do now is ensure that the next generation can 
contribute to our economy and to our society.
  The DREAM Act applies to a very specific group of talented, motivated 
young people who already call America home. This is their home. It 
applies only to those who came here at age 15 or younger and have been 
here at least 5 years. Even then, in order to have a chance at 
permanent legal residency, they would have to graduate from high 
school, pass strict criminal background checks, and attend college or 
serve in the military for at least 2 years.
  I have said on this floor before--but I will repeat it--when I first 
became aware of the problem we had in our country, I was in Smith 
Valley, NV, an agricultural community in the northeastern part of our 
State. I was a relatively new Senator. They had gotten all the students 
there in a very small high school together. I made a presentation to 
them. When I finished, I could tell there was a girl who wanted to talk 
to me. She was there; I could see her and feel her presence. I knew she 
was embarrassed to talk to me, so I said, ``Do you want to talk to 
me?'' And she said, ``Yes.'' She alone said to me:

       Senator, I am the smartest kid in my class. I have the best 
     grades. But I can't go to college. My parents came here 
     illegally. What am I supposed to do with my life?

  At that time, I didn't know that this brilliant, young, beautiful 
woman of Hispanic origin could not go to college, but she could not. 
That is what this is all about. I don't know where that young woman is 
now, whether she has completed college or whether she working in the 
onion and garlic farms up there--I just don't know. I have thought 
about that many times.
  When we jeopardize our education, we jeopardize our economy. The 
Congressional Budget Office found that letting these men and women 
contribute to our society will reduce the deficit by more than $1 
billion. A UCLA study found that the DREAM Act would add as much as 
$3.5 trillion to our economy--that is trillion with a ``t.'' That comes 
from the University of California at Los Angeles. This bill is not only 
the right thing to do, it is also a very good investment.
  The Defense Department also knows it is good for national security. 
The Pentagon has said it will help it meet the recruitment goals of our 
All-Volunteer Force. That is why our military

[[Page 22934]]

made it part of its 2010 to 2012 strategic plan. That is in their plan, 
the Pentagon's plan.
  Some Republicans are trying to demonize these young men and women, 
who love this country and want to contribute to it and fight for it. 
The real faces of the DREAM Act are the dreamers.
  I was welcomed to Washington on Thursday. There was a beautiful child 
there with a graduation hat on, a four-cornered hat. She was a dreamer. 
She wants to be able to go to college. That is all she wants. And we 
have others who want to be able to join the military.
  The real faces belong to people such as Astrid Silva, who wrote to me 
from Nevada to tell me this--and I have visited her on many occasions:

       I am 22 and have never even stolen a piece of gum from a 7-
     11; yet, I feel as though my forehead says ``felon.''

  Ricardo Cornejo wrote to me from Las Vegas to tell me that young men 
like him ``would love to fight and give our entire lives for our 
country.''
  Opponents use the word ``amnesty,'' hoping to trick people into 
thinking this bill is something it is not. They are trying to play to 
people's worst fears.
  One Senator said in the presence of one of these dreamers that he 
could not vote for it because that law said one didn't need to serve. 
All you need to do is sign up. I say to this U.S. Senator and anyone 
else suggesting such an absurdity: Read the bill. It takes 2 years of 
service in the military. It will be longer than 2 years because you 
have to sign up for more than 2 years. We certainly get our money's 
worth in that regard. The DREAM Act could not be further from amnesty. 
It is an opportunity that gives nothing for free and demands a great 
deal of those who earn legal residency. It is not granting citizenship 
immediately; it puts them on the pathway to citizenship. It gives 
nobody incentives to break the law but to contribute to our Nation and 
its economy.
  When it passes--Mr. President, I hope it passes, as my friend Senator 
Durbin said today, but it is going to pass--millions of children who 
grew up in America as Americans will be able to get the education they 
need to contribute to our economy. Many who have volunteered to defend 
our country will no longer have to fear being deported.
  Democrats know this is good policy. Republicans know it too. That is 
why Senator Orrin Hatch coauthored it 10 years ago, and that is why the 
Wall Street Journal's very conservative editorial board called it a 
worthy immigration bill within the last few weeks. The only question is 
whether we will let good policy inform our votes or let partisan 
politics get in the way of so many futures--not just of these children 
but our own.

                          ____________________