Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act Of 2007
Floor Speech
COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM ACT OF 2007 -- (Senate - June 06, 2007)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. VITTER. I thank all my colleagues for their courtesies.
Madam President, I rise in strong support of the Cornyn amendment and in opposition to the much weaker, watered-down Democratic alternative.
This amendment illustrates a lot about this debate. The Cornyn amendment is clear. It is necessary. It is common sense. It is absolutely necessary we pass amendments such as this and have the ability to debate and vote on amendments such as this in the important immigration debate.
This amendment is very straightforward. It prevents terrorists, gang members, sex offenders, and other folks who have broken the law in significant ways, committed significant felonies, from receiving immigration benefits and citizenship in the future. How can any of us in the Senate oppose a straightforward and necessary commonsense amendment? How can any of us be comfortable with an underlying bill which has these gaping loopholes? We must address these gaping loopholes. How can we tell families across America that we are going to allow sex offenders and gang members to become legal residents, possibly citizens? The Cornyn amendment would prevent this. It would address all of these significant loopholes.
Again, terrorists, gang members, violent gang members, those who have committed other significant felonies, those who have been detained for coming into the country illegally and have absconded, those who have been deported from the country for coming into the country illegally and have reentered illegally--all of those categories of illegals should be prevented from gaining the benefits of this bill. The Cornyn amendment clearly does that.
The Democratic alternative clearly does not. It has significant omissions from the Cornyn amendment. It allows absconders, those who have been detained and have gone underground, to receive the benefits of the bill. It allows those who have been deported from the country and who came back in illegally to get the benefits of this bill. It allows others who fall into the category of gang members and those who committed serious felonies to gain the benefits of this legislation. That is simply wrong. We must support the commonsense, straightforward Cornyn amendment.
I also want to spend a portion of my time urging my colleagues to not vote for cloture on this bill as it presently rests before us, because we have many important amendments to consider. Two of those are the amendments I will humbly offer to the Senate. They are important issues; they are important amendments. I urge us to pay careful consideration to them and to have an opportunity for debate and vote.
In that spirit, I ask unanimous consent to lay aside the pending amendment and to call up my amendment No. 1338.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. KENNEDY. I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
Mr. VITTER. I am sorry to hear that. Let me try my second amendment which is also at the desk. It concerns a significant provision in the bill which we need the opportunity to debate and vote on. That is Vitter amendment No. 1339.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. KENNEDY. I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
Mr. VITTER. Madam President, unfortunately, this illustrates the point about the inappropriateness of cloture. These are two significant amendments which go to important provisions of the bill. All of us--and more importantly, the American people--deserve to have these matters debated and voted on. Let me explain what these amendments are about. Everybody--certainly the majority side--has been given the amendments.
My first amendment only requires what Congress originally mandated back in 1986; that is, the entry/exit system known today as US-VISIT. We must have that fully operational before all aspects of this bill are allowed to go into effect. It was authorized 10 years ago, but it is not near to fully operational now. We must make sure that it is a part of this bill's enforcement trigger.
Without the US-VISIT system's completion, we can't be sure that we know what individuals are in the country. In fact, we can be sure we will not know because how can we possibly have a grasp of who is in the country and who is not in the country without this system which tracks people as they exit? There are a lot of folks on visas here for a limited period of time. Under that visa, they, of course, need to exit the country before their visa is up. The US-VISIT system allows us to know if they are doing that. How can we possibly be ready for the full implementation of this legislation, how can we possibly say we have the enforcement system we need in place without the US-VISIT system, without knowing who exits the country and when, without knowing whether they have overstayed their visa?
As of 2006, the illegal population included 4 to 5.5 million overstays, people here illegally because they are overstaying the time limits of their visa. The US-VISIT system is absolutely necessary to get to the heart of the problem and to enforce against overstays. How can we say we have adequate enforcement, how can we trigger the other provisions of this bill without making sure we have that in place, functioning, fully operational?
The US-VISIT system is not any part of the triggers now in the bill. It must be. That is what my amendment 1339 goes to.
As I mentioned, I have another amendment, No. 1338, that would correct a provision in the bill which doesn't allow for a catch-and-release program anymore but simply changes that to a catch, pay, and release program. In this legislation, those in this country illegally who are caught and who are not from Mexico don't have to be kept in custody. They can be released on a $5,000 bond. For months, and indeed years, we on the Senate floor and those around the country have decried the catch-and-release program, a program that has been in place where illegals are caught but are released into our country and simply given a piece of paper that says: Show up to court on such-and-such a date. Guess what. They never do. This bill merely changes that to a catch, pay, and release program. It allows catch and release to continue, only with a $5,000 bond.
Why is that a problem? Because many of the folks we are talking about, particularly those who are among the most dangerous, those involved in illegal drug activity, those in other organized crime, can get the $5,000 bond. If they are already paying human smugglers to get them across the border, in many cases thousands and thousands of dollars, one has to assume they can get the resources to pay this bond. Changing catch and release to catch, pay, and release is completely inadequate. Yet that is what the underlying legislation does.
Amendment No. 1338 would close that loophole, would say: No, we are going to end catch and release forever, and we are not going to allow cash, pay, and release. When we catch these folks coming into the country illegally who are not from Mexico, so we can't simply send them back to Mexico at the southern border, we are going to detain them. We are not going to let them into the country on a bond or anything else. We are going to detain them until they are deported, and we are going to work very hard to deport them as quickly as possible.
Again, I believe my two amendments, which have not been allowed to be offered, clearly illustrate why we are not ready for cloture on this bill. This is a significant debate on a massive, 800-page bill. This bill, if enacted, will affect our country in major and significant ways for decades to come. Everybody admits that, no matter what side of the debate they may be on. Yet we have only been allowed to have a modest number of votes on the bill, something on the order of 12. That is ridiculous. We need these sorts of amendments considered and voted on, and we must oppose cloture until that happens.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source