Negro Leauges Baseball Museum

NEGRO LEAGUES BASEBALL MUSEUM

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I asked my staff how many amendments have been filed to this bill. The number is 228 amendments; 228 amendments have been filed to this bill. If you follow the proceedings of the Senate, you know there is no way on Earth we can consider 228 amendments and actually vote on this bill by the end of this week or even by the end of next week. It is physically impossible. Decisions will have to be made, as they are made on every single piece of legislation, on which amendments will be cut, which amendments will be considered.

I have had amendments that I thought were extremely important that didn't make the cut. That is the nature of this Chamber. Sometimes we have to step back and say at some point we will have to vote on a bill if we want a bill passed.

Our concern on this side of the aisle is that if we get mired down in the amendment process, we have a fundamental problem. What we are witnessing here you cannot analogize to a baseball game because in a baseball game, there is no clock. In the Senate, there is a clock, not just by day but by week. And at the end of this week, we are scheduled to go on recess.

For that reason, Senator HARRY REID, the Democratic leader of the Senate, filed a cloture motion yesterday. Under the Senate rules, that means that tomorrow morning at about 10 o'clock, we will vote as to whether we want to close off debate, close off the amendment number at 228, or let more amendments pile on.

What is the likelihood that we would consider and pass this bill this week if we allow all amendments to be filed that each Member wishes? There is no chance whatsoever.

What Senator Reid believes and I share is that we have a historic opportunity. We may never get this chance again. The last time we had any serious debate about immigration reform was more than a decade ago. Honestly, the situation has gotten worse in this country ever since. Now we have a chance. We have a chance because on a bipartisan basis, the Senate Judiciary Committee produced a bill. It is not perfect, but it is a good bill, strongly supported by Senator Kennedy on our side and Senator McCain on the other side, supported by Republicans and Democrats who brought it out of the committee 12 to 6.

Our fear is that if we allow this process to mire down with hundreds of amendments, the clock will run out; we will have missed our chance.

It pains me to hear my colleagues on the other side of the aisle say there is no way we can vote for cloture, there is no way we can vote to close down the amendments that are going to be filed here. We have to stand together as a party. I think there is more at stake. I think this bill, this bipartisan bill, is evidence that both parties can come together and must come together if we are going to solve an intractable problem, such as the problem of immigration reform.

America is not going to remember whether we considered 1 amendment, 5 amendments, 10 amendments or 20 amendments. America will not remember whether Senator Kyl's amendment was called first or fifth in order. But America will remember with this vote tomorrow who was on the right side of history, who was on that side of history that said we have to move forward to reconcile a serious challenge in this Nation.

The Senator from Kansas talks about security. I am happy to report to him that every bill under consideration dealing with immigration has strong security provisions. There is a provision offered by Senator Frist to make our borders stronger. Virtually the same provision is being offered on the Democratic side of the aisle in a bipartisan bill. There is no argument about enforcement, strengthening our borders, knowing who is here, where they work, where they live, and what they do. If we are going to be a secure nation, that is essential.

There is no argument about employer enforcement. It has to be part of an enforcement system.

Where we do have differences of opinion, of course, is what to do with 11 or 12 million people already here. We think we have struck the right balance, giving people an opportunity over an 11-year period of time to earn their way to citizenship. If they work hard, if they have a job, if they pay their taxes, if they have had a criminal background check, if they are learning English, if they know about our Nation's history and its civics, if the people who are asking for this clearly are good citizens, people of good moral virtue, those are the ones we want as part of our Nation.

I hear my colleagues on the other side of the aisle say unless we can call one amendment or five amendments before 10 o'clock tomorrow morning, we would as soon see this process stop. That would be unfortunate. Voting for cloture doesn't mean there is an end to amendments. It means there is a limited time for those amendments pending, some 30 hours. We still have time to debate and amend this bill, and we will. But Senator Reid and I share in the belief that we need a process that brings this to a conclusion. There is no way we can deal with 228 amendments and have this bill completed this week. That is why we moved forward on this effort to try to file cloture on a bipartisan basis and move this bill to final passage.

I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Colorado for his leadership on this issue. I do not know if he saw the program ``Frontline'' recently, but it talked about the methamphetamine scourge that is affecting the United States and the fact that now more of this illicit drug is coming in from Mexico. It is a serious, serious problem. I congratulate him for addressing this problem.

I hope he understands that when we offered to call his amendment, asked for unanimous consent to call his amendment and adopt his amendment, there was objection on his side of the aisle. We stand ready at this moment to call your amendment for a vote and to adopt it immediately. I think it is a very important amendment, and it is one of those that was on the agreed list and, unfortunately, a Member on your side objected to it. So I hope we can get to it soon. I thank the Senator for his leadership on this amendment.

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I understand negotiations are going on between the leadership in both parties, and my understanding is the methamphetamine amendment may very well be included in a managers' amendment and we will not have to be necessarily voting on that particular amendment.

There is a second amendment, though, that is very important we do bring up for a vote. I know this is also being discussed by the leadership. That is the one which states that advocates of terrorism be denied a visa.

I have two amendments. My hope is we can get that particular amendment up for a vote. It is the one I just recently asked for a vote on and was denied by your side. But I also understand the leadership on both sides are negotiating. I understand they are negotiating seriously. So I appreciate the fact it is being considered.

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, if the Senator will yield for a question or comment.

Mr. ALLARD. Yes.

Mr. DURBIN. I will just say that we believe the underlying bill, the Specter substitute bill, has very strong language to make it clear we do not want anyone in the United States associated with terrorism. We certainly do not want anyone in the United States associated with terrorism to reach legal status. That is reprehensible.

So I am prepared to offer to work with the Senator from Colorado on his amendment to make sure we have included that category with which he is most concerned. I thank him for his leadership.

Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Illinois for indicating support for that. I just think we need to go and get more specific language in the bill that we will be considering and, hopefully, will be reported off the floor of the Senate. I am just trying to address that.

Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, over the last hour or two on the floor of the Senate there has been a procedural move by some Senators on the other side of the aisle which reduces the likelihood of a compromise on the immigration bill. I sincerely hope it doesn't end this effort because I think there are people of good faith on both sides of the aisle still trying to find a way to pass this important piece of legislation.

I want to give special credit on the Republican side of the aisle to Senator Martinez, who I believe is working as hard as any person can to find the right language that preserves the basic principles of the Specter substitute, the bipartisan bill which passed the Senate Judiciary Committee. I hope he is successful. But there is a deadline looming and that deadline is a vote tomorrow morning on a motion for cloture.

Cloture is a procedure in the Senate which closes down debate and says we will limit the number of amendments that may be considered in the 30 hours after cloture is voted favorably. I am hoping that before tomorrow morning people of good will, trying to find a way to break this deadlock, will be able to do so. But the procedural effort by Senator Kyl a few minutes ago is going to make that a little more difficult. I still think we can achieve that goal.

I also want to address a couple of comments made by the junior Senator from Arizona on the floor concerning the history of this bill and the process that led to this day. This last Sunday I was on a talk show, ``Face The Nation,'' with Chairman James Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. He is the author of the House immigration bill which passed in December. That bill includes very serious criminal penalties for those who are living in the United States undocumented, who may number as many as 11 or 12 million people. It also includes very serious criminal penalties for those who would help them reside in the United States if they are undocumented.

The charge under the Sensenbrenner bill is aggravated felony. It is the same charge leveled at someone accused of being a rapist. It is an extremely serious criminal charge, and the Sensenbrenner bill which passed the House includes this aggravated felony charge.

Most people across America believe the House bill has gone way too far in charging so many people who are in the United States with such a serious crime. On the floor it has been said by the Senator from Arizona that there was an effort to reduce that penalty to a misdemeanor on the floor of the House and that unfortunately the Democrats did not support that effort. It is true that 190 Democrats did not support that effort because they do not favor a criminal penalty for those who are here in an undocumented status. So ultimately the majority party in the House, the Republican Party, prevailed and the bill came to us with an aggravated felony as a charge against those who are here undocumented and those who help them.

What it means in the real world is that people of faith who are volunteers at soup kitchens or shelters for homeless people and those who are victims of domestic violence, volunteers who help children of the undocumented, tutoring them for classes, helping them in their lives, coaching their teams, nurses who provide volunteer assistance at clinics that treat the undocumented in the city of Chicago and around the United States, would be subject to a felony charge under the Sensenbrenner bill.

Senator Specter came to the Senate Judiciary Committee and offered an alternative. His alternative reduced the criminal charge to a misdemeanor. We brought that up for a vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee and I am glad that on a bipartisan basis we removed the criminal penalty that was in the original bill. I think that was a positive step forward.

The Senator from Arizona, who has raised this question, did not support our efforts to remove criminalization from the Specter bill, but the bill as it comes to the floor, thankfully, does not include criminalization. I hope that is the end of that issue as to whether we are going to charge Good Samaritans with a misdemeanor or a felony for helping needy people across America. I hope it is not revived as one of the concepts in this immigration reform.

The junior Senator from Arizona, Senator Kyl, also raised questions about whether people who were guilty of a crime should be allowed to become legal in America or citizens in America. We tried to be very express in our statement in the bill, the Specter substitute, which was drafted originally by Senators McCain and Kennedy on a bipartisan basis, that if you are guilty of a crime we don't want you as an American. We understand you have done something in your life which disqualifies you from what we are going to offer you, a long and serious opportunity to find a pathway to legalization and citizenship.

Under the Judiciary Committee bill, the Specter bill as reported, the following is a partial list of crimes that make an individual ineligible for legalization. I read this list because there have been suggestions on the floor by the Senator from Arizona that we are not serious about this. Let me tell you expressly the crimes that would disqualify you from ever becoming a legal resident of America or a citizen under this bill: Crimes of moral turpitude such as aggravated assault, assault with a deadly weapon, aggravated DUI, fraud, larceny, forgery; controlled substances offenses--sale, possession, distribution of drugs and drug trafficking; theft offenses, including shoplifting; public nuisances; multiple criminal convictions. Any alien convicted of two or more offenses, regardless of whether the offense arose from a single scheme of misconduct and regardless of whether the offenses involved moral turpitude, for which the aggregate sentences to confinement were 5 years or more, crimes of violence, counterfeiting, bribery, perjury, certain aliens involved in serious criminal activity who have asserted immunity from prosecution, foreign government officials who have committed particularly severe violations of religious freedom, significant traffickers of persons, money laundering, murder, rape, sexual abuse of a minor, possession of explosives, child pornography, attempts or conspiracies to commit most of these offenses--and there are some security-related crimes that make a person ineligible as well, espionage or sabotage--engaging in terrorist activity.

The reason I make special note of that is there have been references several times on the floor by the Senator from Arizona to Mohamed Atta, the fact he was a terrorist, a man who was responsible in large part for the tragedy of 9/11. Make no mistake, that bill would not give him an opportunity to become a citizen of the United States. Why in the world would we ever consider that? I am sure the Senators from both sides of the aisle who supported the bill would never, ever consider that possibility.

Those who were associated with terrorist activities, representatives of a terrorist organization, spouse or child of an individual who is inadmissible as a terrorist, activity that is deemed to have adverse foreign policy consequences, and those who are members in a totalitarian party.

We have cast the net far and wide to disqualify people from even being considered for legal status in this country if they have been guilty of this type of conduct.

So though the Senator from Arizona and I may disagree on some other aspects of the bill, when it comes to criminal activity I think we are in agreement. Criminal activity is going to disqualify you from being considered for legalization in the United States. That is a tough standard, but it is the right standard and I hope we can make it clear during the course of this debate that we believe it is important to maintain in the bill and that the amendment of Senator Kyl does not add anything, really, remarkably, to this criminal disqualification.

The bill which passed out of committee, of course, sets up several things. First, it sets up an enforcement mechanism which is substantial, much like the amendment offered by Senator Sessions of Alabama in the committee. It adds 12,000 new agents to our Border Patrol, adds 1,000 investigators a year for the next 5 years--that was Senator Specter's amendment; new security perimeter, under Senator Specter, virtual fence, tightened controls, exit/entry security system at all land borders and airports, construction of barriers for vehicles and mandating new roads where needed, fences, checkpoints, ports of entry, increased resources for transporting aliens, new criminal penalties for tunnels--that was a recommendation of Senators Feinstein and Kyl--new criminal penalties for evading immigration officers, by Senator Sessions--all of these amendments accepted, included in the bill in the enforcement section--new criminal penalties for money laundering offered by Senator Sessions, accepted as part of this bipartisan bill.

There is an amendment on a comprehensive surveillance plan by Senator Specter; and also, I should say, expanded smuggling efforts, improved interagency cooperation on alien smuggling; increased document fraud detection; biometric identifiers; expanded detention authority; and increased detention facilities and beds.

We require the Department of Homeland Security to acquire 20 new detention facilities to accommodate at least 10,000 detainees, a suggestion by Senator Sessions which is part of this bill; expanded terrorist removal grounds; expanded aggravated felony definition; increased Federal penalties for gangs; removal of those who have failed to depart; increased criminal sentences for repeat illegal entrants; new removal grounds; passport fraud and fraud offenses as a ground for removal; removal of criminals prior to release; new authority for State and local police to investigate, apprehend, arrest, detain, or transfer aliens to Federal custody; immigration status in the NCIC database now becomes an element that we require; we prohibit time limits on background collection; impose criminal penalties for aid for the undocumented; assistance to States to help prosecute and imprison undocumented criminal aliens; stronger employment verification procedures; penalties for employers who hire undocumented aliens are increased; additional worksite enforcement and fraud detection agents.

We add 10,000 new worksite enforcement agents, 2,000 every year for the next 5 years, and 5,000 new fraud detection agents, 1,000 each year for the next 5 years.

I read this lengthy list so the Record would be clear that we have made serious efforts on a bipartisan basis to accept amendments even from those Senators who oppose the underlying bill so there is no question that we will have strong enforcement standards to secure our Nation's borders, and to also say those employers who ignore the law will be penalized and will be investigated so that they understand we are serious.

The reason, of course, I bring this up is the suggestion earlier that this bill would not strengthen our borders. I think it does. I think it makes a genuine effort on a bipartisan basis to deal with our broken borders.

It also says, however, that once in the United States, for the undocumented status we will give you a chance, a chance to work your way to citizenship. It is a long journey. It has many serious requirements as you move toward that goal, and many people won't make it. Some will fail in the effort. But if you want to become legal in the United States of America, you need a clean criminal record. And I spelled out here the crimes that would clearly disqualify you.

You must show you have been employed here since January of 2004. You must remain continuously employed, pay approximately $2,000 in fines and fees, pass a security background check, pass a medical exam, learn English, learn U.S. history, pay all your U.S. back taxes, and then if you have met all nine requirements, you go to the back of the line. It is your turn after all of those who have applied through the legal processes which are currently available.

So those who argue this bill is amnesty and it is automatic, that it is a free ticket to citizenship overlook the obvious. These are stringent requirements. Many people will never meet them. Some will give up. But those who are determined to become American citizens and a part of our country, determined to be legal in their residency, who work hard and achieve it, if they keep their eye on the goal--and the goal is after 11 years--will finally see that day when they can be sworn in as a citizen of the United States.

Tomorrow morning we are facing a very serious vote on cloture. There have been a lot of arguments made on the floor as to whether the right amendments have been called. We tried to bring additional amendments to the floor in the last couple of days, unsuccessfully. There have been disagreements about which amendments should be called and in what order.

I don't think history is going to long note or remember what order the amendments were that were called before this bill is up for cloture. If the cloture vote fails tomorrow, if 60 Senators don't step forward to vote for it, sadly that could be the end of immigration reform for the entire year.

It is a very busy calendar we have in the Senate. It deals with things that are of great urgency. When we return after the Easter recess, we will have a supplemental appropriations bill for our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is a very high priority. The Defense authorization bill will follow; then a string of appropriations bills that need to be enacted before we take our 4th of July break.

There is a lot to be done. I am hoping we can get it all done. But the thought that we can carve out another week or two to return to immigration at a later date may be fanciful. I am not sure we can achieve that. This is the moment.

Tomorrow many Senators will come to the floor and decide whether they will be part of history, whether they will cast a vote for cloture which brings to the floor a definite deadline and timetable for debating this comprehensive immigration reform.

It has been decades since we took this up seriously. We have spent a lot of time. We have a strong bipartisan bill. We have a bill that is supported by business and labor groups across America, including many religious groups that have come forward and encouraged us to do this in the name of humanity and of American values.

Tomorrow, with this cloture vote we will have a chance to be on the RECORD for time immemorial as to where we stand on this issue.

Some have already decided to oppose this bill. They are going to, postcloture. I understand that. But for those who think they can vote against cloture and argue they were for this bill, they may have a tough time describing that to the people back home.

I think about those I met this last week. I mentioned it earlier on the floor. The students in the Catholic high school in Chicago are following this debate every single day. They know their future is at stake. These are children who came to the United States at an early age because their parents decided to come here. They have lived here their entire lives. They have gone to school here, lived in the neighborhoods of America, and some have been extraordinary successes against great odds. Their life's dream is the same dream those children have, to be a part of America's future and do something good in their lives. They will be denied that opportunity if the DREAM Act, which is part of this bill, does not pass. They will be illegal and undocumented. If the legal system catches up with them, it will tell them to return to a country they cannot even remember. If it doesn't catch up to them, they will continue to reside in the United States in undocumented and illegal status, unable to get a driver's license in many States, unable to be approved to be teachers and licensed to contribute to America, unable to secure the important jobs that can make a difference in our future. Their fate is tied to this bill.

Those who vote against cloture tomorrow have basically said we don't need them; that we don't need to pass the DREAM Act; that these children and their fate and their future is none of our business. I think it is.

I think these young people, some of whom I was with this last Saturday, are amazing. They have overcome the odds. They want to contribute, have the chance every kid in America wants, to prove themselves and have an opportunity to show they are worthy of American citizenship. Why do we turn them down? Wouldn't we want to make certain they have that chance? A vote for cloture tomorrow is going to give them that chance. A vote against cloture will not.

There are many who will argue that they are against this bill. I hope other amendments will be offered.

Senator Kennedy came to the floor earlier and said if you don't like this bill, vote for cloture. Close down the amendments that can be offered, limit the amount of debate and then vote against the bill, if that is your wish. But give us a chance.

Tomorrow morning we will be asking for that chance from 60 Members of the Senate which is necessary for that cloture motion to prevail.

Senator Kyl suggested that the only way to move forward to a vote on this comprehensive package and the amendments is if his amendment is voted on first. Senator Kyl was in discussion with me this morning and acknowledged that we need to sit down and make some important changes to the amendment which is presently before us. There are some parts that are vague and uncertain. Lives hang in the balance.

I tried to make it clear to Senator Kyl there are ways he can use his own language that he used in previous bills and tighten up the language in his bill so there is no uncertainty and less vagueness. I am prepared to sit down with him and the staff. I tried to reach him during the course of the day. I know he is very busy. If he wants to work to bring the language together on this amendment, I want to work with him and hope we can find a way to strike some good language that might be supported on both sides of the aisle.

I see the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee on the floor. I will not miss this opportunity to say while I have the floor that I respect him very much for what he has done in the committee, the hard work in committee which I am proud to be part of. I thank him for his hard work in bringing this bill to the floor. We have had a rocky period of time during the amendment phase--not nearly as many amendments as I would have liked to have seen called. But I hope after the cloture vote tomorrow we can roll up our sleeves in the remaining period of time and do the right thing, pass the Specter substitute with some key amendments and show that this Senate is dedicated to true, comprehensive immigration reform.

I yield the floor.

http://thomas.loc.gov/