Broader Options for Americans Act -- Continued
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, today we mourn the loss of life of at least 17 people at the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School near Fort Lauderdale, FL. We are reminded that when we are asked to do something, there are things we can do to help lessen the likelihood of such terrible tragedies, recognizing that each of these circumstances is unique, and we don't yet know everything that there is to know or that we should know about this particular shooter. Suffice it to say, he telegraphed on social media, according to reports, his intention to do what he ultimately did.
We in Congress, the policymakers, need to come up with tools to be available to law enforcement and the social media platforms to be able to monitor these sort of terroristic threats much in the same way we monitor social media for al-Qaida and ISIS and other terrorists abroad who try to recruit people in the United States in order to kill our fellow citizens in place. We need to not only think about and pray for the families and teachers and support staff who have been affected by this terrible act but conduct hearings and talk to the experts and find out what kind of tools might be available to us.
I will mention another example of something we could do that would, I am confident, save lives.
In my home State of Texas only a few months ago, we saw a mass shooting in a small town called Sutherland Springs, which is near San Antonio. The gunman there killed 26 people and wounded 20 more. He was a convicted felon. Under existing law, he could not legally purchase or possess firearms, but that didn't stop him from getting the weapons he used to murder those 26 people and shoot 20 more. Part of the reason was, his criminal history had not been uploaded to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, which is maintained by the FBI. So the gun retailer, when he had gone in and lied on the background check document, hadn't known he had been legally disqualified from purchasing a firearm.
I have introduced legislation to try to fix that specific problem. It is called the Fix NICS Act. The House has already passed it, but it is awaiting action in the Senate.
Our churches and schools should be refuges--places where parents and children, especially, feel safe and secure. Many of these shootings can be prevented, perhaps not all, but we need to do everything we can. Part of the way we can ensure that our children are protected is to enforce current law--and not just our children but adults as well, as we saw in Sutherland Springs. We can fix our broken background check system and prohibit dangerous individuals who have been convicted of serious crimes from acquiring firearms legally.
As I said, we don't know all of the facts of the Florida shooting, and the circumstances, as is almost always the case, appear to be a little cloudy right now. It may be we will find out there are some clues that this shooter had been sending well in advance of this terrible tragedy that might have prevented it from occurring.
There is no reason we cannot advance this bipartisan legislation, the Fix NICS legislation, which has already passed in the House. I, personally, am unwilling to face another family member who has lost a loved one as a result of one of these mass shootings that could have been prevented by making sure the background check system had worked as Congress had intended.
Mr. President, on a separate note, this week, a group led by Chairman Grassley of the Senate Judiciary Committee formally introduced a bill to address the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals issue and border security. It is a good starting point because it could actually be signed into law and solve the challenge we have promised to address in providing these young people who, through no fault of their own, find themselves in a box. Because they cannot become American citizens due to the fact that their parents brought them into the country illegally, it would provide them a predictable and productive future. I am glad to be a cosponsor of this legislation, which is called the Secure and Succeed Act.
As the President has promised, it does provide a pathway to citizenship for an estimated 1.8 million people who are DACA-eligible. That is an extraordinary offer by the President of the United States. Who would have ever thought this President would say to these young people, ``We are going to give you a chance to become American citizens''? That number is far more than those who were covered by the Executive order that was signed by President Obama because, right now, there are only about 690,000--I say ``only''--DACA recipients. President Trump would make it 1.8 million.
Just as importantly, this bill provides a real plan to strengthen border security by utilizing more boots on the ground, better technology, and additional infrastructure, and it enhances and modernizes our ports of entry through which many of the illegal drugs come that flow into this country from the south.
This bill reallocates visas from the diversity lottery system, which is just sort of like a roll of the dice, but it will do it in a way that is fair, and it continues the family-based immigration categories until the current backlog is cleared.
I know other colleagues have been working hard on their own ideas, some of which were introduced yesterday and earlier this morning, but one group I haven't heard much from so far is that of our colleagues across the aisle who shut down the government over the weekend a couple of weeks ago because they insisted we provide a time to address this issue.
Indeed, in response, once they agreed to reopen the government, the majority leader offered them that time and that opportunity, and that is this week. Yet, so far, none of our Democratic colleagues have even produced a bill. Rather, the bill has been produced by Senator Grassley and his working group I mentioned. There is another bill by Senator Collins and Senator Rounds, which we will be voting on here shortly. Then, I believe, Senator Gardner and Senator Bennet have another proposal. The very folks who shut down the government over this issue have failed to produce a plan in response to this demand that we have a debate and that we have a vote to try to address the problem.
On Tuesday, the majority leader tried twice to open the debate and start voting, but, both times, there were objections heard by our Democratic colleagues--this despite their repeated promises over the years to address the DACA issue once and for all. Now the clock has run so we can finally get started, and we will start voting, as I understand the majority leader's unanimous consent request, at about 2:30 today. We are just getting started in our voting due to the stalling and the lack of, really, much debate. Certainly, there have been no substantive offers up until this point from our colleagues across the aisle.
I believe sincerely that Republicans and Democrats alike want to provide certainty to these DACA recipients, but we have to address the underlying problems with our border security and our flawed immigration system as well.
I know our colleague from Pennsylvania has introduced an amendment to end dangerous sanctuary city policies. It is simply unacceptable for local jurisdictions to decide they are not going to cooperate with Federal law enforcement agencies. We are a nation, and we are a nation of laws, so the idea that some local group could decide not to cooperate with Federal law enforcement authorities ought to worry all of us.
Even though this amendment has been endorsed by the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association and the National Association of Police Organizations, many of our colleagues across the aisle will probably vote against it. That is especially odd since some of them voted to advance a similar sanctuary city measure themselves in 2015.
Even more of our Democratic colleagues voted to advance what is known as Kate's Law in 2016. It is named for Kate Steinle, the young woman who was murdered in San Francisco by an illegal immigrant who had been released from custody. Kate's Law would stiffen penalties for illegal immigrants who have been caught entering the country repeatedly, as her killer had done. What is controversial about that? If you break the law repeatedly and we find you, there should be very serious consequences. Perhaps Kate Steinle would be alive today had that been the case before her untimely death.
I don't know why our Democratic colleagues refuse to vote for these and other related proposals. I really don't get it. Yet I do know one thing that is worth highlighting: Their unwillingness to support reforms represents a stark departure from what they have said in the past.
For example, in 2006, the senior Senator from California said: ``Democrats are solidly behind controlling the border, and we support the border fence. . . . We've got to get tough on the border.'' She was then joined by then-Senator Harry Reid, who had made similar statements.
The senior Senator from Colorado has said the Democrats still believe in border security. That is good to hear. I wish their actions reflected that.
In recent years, the junior Senator from New Mexico has said: ``It is critical we have the personnel, equipment, and policies in place that focus enforcement on the most significant public safety threats along the border.'' I could not have said that better myself, but when it comes time to vote, strangely, almost uniformly, our colleagues vote no.
I agree with our colleague from Indiana as well, who went down to the border a while back and said he had seen for himself just how bad the situation was in certain areas. That is why he voted to hire more border agents, penalize businesses that hire illegal immigrants, and deport those who commit felonies.
My point is, we should all remember we are not as far apart as the press would seem to make it. Now it is time to advance the bill to that effect--not next time, not next month, not next year. We know the clock is ticking. The President has given us until March 5 to get this done, but if this week is any indication, our colleagues on the other side don't seem to be in any particular hurry.
As the majority leader said earlier this week, we need to stop making political points and start making a law. That means passing it out of the Senate, passing it out of the House, and getting the President to sign it into law. That is how you make law. Several weeks ago, as I said, the majority leader made a commitment to hold this debate and to hold it this week. He has lived up to that commitment, and now we can't let it all just go to waste and squander this opportunity.
I am really shocked by that after the President made this offer of a pathway to citizenship for 1.8 million young adults who were brought into this country as children illegally by their parents. I have always said we don't hold children responsible for their parents' mistakes. That is why we should embrace this proposal by the President. I don't know how you tell these young people we had the opportunity to address their anxiety and the uncertainty in their futures by passing a bill that encompasses the President's proposal and gives them a pathway to citizenship. How do you look them in their faces and say we squandered this golden opportunity, maybe a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity?
That is what this week is about. There are about 124,000 DACA recipients in my State of Texas, and I will proudly cast a vote soon to ensure that they stay here and contribute to our schools, our churches, and our communities. We are a nation of immigrants, but we are also a nation of laws, and you cannot have one without the other.
What this week is about is finding a bipartisan permanent solution for these young adults but doing more than just that. I, certainly, respect that some of our colleagues have introduced thoughtful ideas, but we have to remember that, ultimately, we need to move a bill through the Senate that can pass not only this body but the House and be signed into law by the President.
This is not about grandstanding or making a political point. The idea is to produce a result, one that we have all said we want. So let's not waste any more time. Let's send the House and then the President something that can become law and provide certainty to these young people who are worried about their future and regain our legacy as a nation that believes in the rule of law and security for all.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. CORNYN. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. CORNYN. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. CORNYN. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. CORNYN. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source