Secure Fence Act of 2006--Resumed

SECURE FENCE ACT OF 2006--Resumed -- (Senate - September 29, 2006)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I would like to take a few moments to explain why I voted against limiting debate on the Secure Fence Act of 2006 when that vote occurred last night.

In large measure my decision to vote against cloture was procedural. This Senate has had no opportunity to debate and amend the bill before us today. There are some very important amendments that our colleagues would have like to offer which now they cannot.

Those who do not understand Senate procedure might ask, how could that be possible? After all, hasn't this bill been the pending business of the Senate off and on for 6 days?

Let me explain. The Senate majority leader has, as is his right, used Senate procedures to block Senators from offering or voting on amendments. He has done what is called filling the amendment tree. Until the Senate voted last night to limit debate on this legislation, no vote was taken on any amendment to this bill. Now that cloture has been invoked, many otherwise pertinent and important amendments are no longer in order to this bill.

Unfortunately, that has been the pattern of conduct with respect to this legislation and others in this Congress. This bill was rushed through the House of Representatives on September 14. There were no Senate hearings on the matter, no committee input into the content of this bill. That is not the way this Senate ordinarily does business, and it is certainly not the best way to address legislation that is supposed to be improving our Nation's security .

The Senate already had a very serious and responsible debate on the subject of border security in the context of its deliberations of comprehensive immigration reform. We spent 9 days debating many amendments on that bill, including amendments related to the construction of fences along the U.S.-Mexico border. The bill ultimately adopted by the Senate provides for 370 miles of fencing in the most vulnerable high-traffic areas along the U.S.-Mexican border. That is what the administration requested and recommended. It also contained a very important requirement that Federal authorities first consult with those who will be most affected by construction of such a fence--relevant local, State, and Federal agencies on both sides of the border. I supported that legislation.

Why is it that the Senate is now being asked to consider a far less comprehensive approach to securing our country? Does anyone really believe that by simply building a fence, adding physical barriers, lights, cameras, and sensors along 730 miles of
our southern border, we are somehow going to make our Nation secure? Do we really believe we can be secure without the cooperation of other governments, most especially our immediate neighbors, Canada and Mexico? And do we really believe that by unilaterally putting up barriers on our southern border and contemplating doing the same on the northern border, we are strengthening the will of Canada or Mexico to give us that cooperation?

Is the next step going to be building fences along the remaining 1,300 miles of our southern border and the more than 3,000 miles of our northern border? At what cost? The Congressional Budget Office puts the cost of the current fence proposal at $3.2 million per mile of fence. Other estimates are even higher--$10 million per mile for some stretches of the fence. When you add in annual maintenance, the cost of the fence could exceed $1 billion. So are we prepared to spend another $5 billion to $6 billion or so to construct an additional 4,300 miles of fencing to complete the job?

In the meantime our immigration system is broken. More than 10 million undocumented aliens live among us but at the same time outside the legal structures of our Government creating additional economic and national security challenges which the comprehensive immigration bill passed by the Senate responsibly sought to address. The pending bill does not.

The House and Senate passed very different legislation related to comprehensive immigration reform and enhanced border security. The President endorsed the Senate-passed measure. What would usually be the next step in the legislative process would be for the House and Senate conferees to meet to reconcile the differences between the two bills. But that is not what has happened in this case.

Rather, the Republican leadership, in an effort to score political points, has rushed through this very minor bill authorizing the construction of fences on the southern border and mandating a study of the advisability of doing so on our northern border. They have blocked any serious debate or amendments to the pending matter, and once final passage occurs they will declare that our Nation is now secure.

That is why I felt strongly last night that we ought to have a real debate on the challenges to our Nation's security and consider relevant amendments that could address those challenges rather than rushing to judgment on the very simplistic and costly approach called for in this bill.

Mr. President, we do our citizens a real disservice when we let election year politics get in the way of the peoples business.

Unfortunatey, it will have to be left to a later date to do what would really enhance our Nation's security; namely, enact legislation to fix our broken immigration system.

http://thomas.loc.gov/