National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011--Motion to Proceed

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I would like to share some thoughts about the surprising decisions that were noted in some of the media that the majority leader, certainly with the support of the administration, plans to introduce a very significant, very controversial, unacceptable amnesty amendment to the Defense authorization bill. The proposal is called the DREAM Act.

A lot of people think this is legislation that we need to deal with, and some have supported it over the years. It has been coming up for quite a number of years and never passed. So what do we have now? We have a scheme to bring it up, not having had it go through the committee process. The bill was introduced March 2009. I assume that is what Majority Leader Reid plans to bring up, but we have not been given the amendment language. So they have got this DREAM Act proposal. They want to add it to the Defense bill, and put it on a bill that is so important they think the Congress will pass it anyway. Pass it as part of the Defense bill. We are weighing down the Defense bill--I am on the Armed Services and Judiciary Committees where both of these matters have come up. They want to weigh down this armed services bill with controversial legislation that ought not to be on it, to jeopardize it and put us in a position where a lot of good people who otherwise want to support the bill will not be able to do so, No. 1.

No. 2, let's talk about the DREAM Act. The American people have every right to be unhappy with this Congress. They have every right to be unhappy with the President of the United States. This Congress and this President have not shown any inclination to end the massive lawlessness that is occurring at our borders. We have learned that. We went through this debate several years ago. I was engaged in it deeply, spent a lot of time and effort on it, and the message the American people sent to us, when they shut down the switchboards in this Senate by so many phone calls, was border security first. We have got to end the lawlessness. So when you take a policy that says you are going to reward people who have entered our country illegally with a guaranteed pathway to citizenship, and with billions of dollars in financial aid or benefits they would not otherwise be entitled to, what message are we sending? We are sending a message, as we have too often sent year after year after year, that we are not committed to a lawful process of immigration in our country.

Let me say, a lot of people some years ago thought that we could never get to a legal system of immigration. And we can. We have made some progress. We have built a fence--not all that was supposed to be built, but the fencing has helped. We have done some things that have helped, but we are not there yet. I believe there is a national consensus out there--polling data shows it. My conversation with my people in my State and around the country in airports and so forth indicates that what we have to do is end the massive illegality and then we can begin to talk about people who have been in our country a long time. I am not saying that is something that should never be talked about and dealt with. But in 1986, this country said, well, we have got a lot of people here illegally. What we have got to do is to make them all legalized and that will end the problem, see. Everybody will be legal then. We do not have a real problem anymore. We promise we will enforce the law in the future.

Well, the amnesty took place immediately and the ending of illegality did not occur. In fact, illegality increased dramatically. Why? Because the message that went out, not the words that were said by politicians on the floor of the Senate, but the real message that went out around the world was, Americans do not care if you get in the country illegally and if you can stay there for a while, you are going to get amnesty too.

It is the same people today who are making the same argument. It cannot sustain scrutiny. It cannot sustain any critical analysis. It will not work. It is a failed policy.

Look at the DREAM Act. It would eliminate the statute passed a little over 10 years ago in 1996 that said, if you are in the country illegally, you should not be given in-State tuition. A really big deal. Oh, it is mean spirited. If you are in the country illegally, I am not sure what you should be entitled to, but certainly not discounted tuition or Pell grants, or student loans.

The first thing you do when you want to end illegality on immigration policy is stop subsidizing it, for heaven's sake. Stop subsidizing it. What kind of mixed message is it when you have people in the country illegally and you give them special benefits, including Social Security and other benefits too?

They will be given a green card that has certain conditions. But, in fact, basically, I would say if you do not commit a felony, you are put on a guaranteed path to citizenship. Well, oh, you have to go to school or get a GED or be enrolled in a community college. What happens when you do these kind of things? I mean, there are people here who have nephews and nieces, children not in this country. They read that we passed such a bill as this. Why would they not think, well, I need to see if I can get my relatives in, my grandchild or whoever, in this country illegally.

They are not allowed to come in. Everybody else has to wait in line, maybe hire lawyers to make sure they can get their entry into the country legally. I will bring in my niece, my nephew, and they will qualify for this act in a few years. Why would that not increase the amount of people who would come into the country illegally? It certainly would do so. We have discussed these issues before.

This is a bogus policy. And after a few years, you are placed on a path to become a full citizen of the United States, ahead of millions of people who waited in line dutifully to get their citizenship. It is a reward for illegality. You can spin it any way you want to. We discussed this for years in this body. It will not stand scrutiny. It is not good policy.

I understand some of my colleagues are saying this is somehow relevant to the Defense bill, because there is an option to serve in the military for two years that will put you on a path to citizenship. Well, there are programs already for people who join the military to enhance their ability to get citizenship.

But this bill is plainly legislation that has been kicked around here for a decade, at least, and it has never been brought up as a Defense bill. It has always been brought up as an immigration bill, which it plainly is. So now to come in and try to say it is somehow connected because of this minute possibility, that 5 percent, probably at most, would demonstrate their educational advantage through the military is a stretch. I want to repeat: What is happening here? This administration, it has been reported, is having internal analyses done to determine how amnesty can be given without congressional action.

They have announced recently that people apprehended in our country illegally will not be deported unless they have committed a felony, presumably DUI or larceny, misdemeanor theft. So as long as you do not plead guilty to a drug felony, that will not lead to deportation.

That is the kind of action that eviscerates enforcement. We do not need to be having that kind of policy in our country. We had the spectacle, shortly after President Obama was elected, when a hard-working, honest ICE agent conducted a raid at a company in Bellingham, Washington and found a whole bunch of people there illegally working, and it caused an uproar.

Secretary Napolitano said, I am going to get to the bottom of it. Was she getting to the bottom of this company that hired a bunch of illegal aliens? No. She was going to get to the bottom of how it was that a law enforcement officer actually had the gumption or the initiative to go out and try to enforce the law in this country. They announced a policy based on campaign promises they had made during the campaign that they were not going to do that anymore. And, presumably, I am not aware of any that have been conducted since. They have people from immigration advocacy groups running to the administration in high concern--you promised us you would not enforce this kind of law.

What do the American people think about this? They are not happy. People should not be happy about it. We are a nation of laws. We need to end the lawlessness. I was a Federal prosecutor for 15 years. I know something about how this has played out, and I have looked at it closely over the last decade. It was not something I chose to be involved with. We almost had to raise a question and begin to examine it.

What I have discovered is, the potential is there, it is within our grasp, to be able to end this massive lawlessness and create a lawful system.

At that point, we will be able to involve the American people and then ask how should we treat people who might have come here young and have been here quite a number of years? How should they be treated? But to do anything that creates a guaranteed path to citizenship for people who are here illegally now will only undermine the progress we have made in enforcement in recent years. People can wish things were different. But in my analysis, we simply have to follow through on the law of the land, to end the lawlessness. We may need to pass legislation to help, and we will. But we also have to have the will of the Commander in Chief, the chief law enforcement officer, the President of the United States. We have to have the support of the majority leader of the Senate, the Speaker of the House, and the majority party in the Senate. They have to be committed to ending lawlessness. Are they or are they not? They will say they are. But I would say this DREAM Act gimmick, this manipulation to stick it on the Defense bill is a clear statement that they are not committed to it.

In fact, what they are committed to is a political plan to assuage some campaign promises made last time and to provide another method of legalizing those who have entered the country illegally. That is not right.

What are we going to do? Let's get busy. Let's end the lawlessness now.
We can do this in a few years. It is not going to break the bank. I have been there and looked at it and studied it. If we followed up on the gains we have made, we would make even more and be in a position to wrestle with these kinds of issues.

My concern is the following: First, it ought not to be on the Defense bill. It ought to come through in the regular order and in the light of day so people can have hearings and testimony, and citizens who are concerned about it on either side can have their view and their say. Secondly, we don't have the money. Estimates I have seen have indicated that this bill, amazingly, could cost the Treasury of the United States $19.2 billion just for the first 2 years. Where are we getting that money from? We are already in record deficits, having almost doubled the debt, and will triple the debt in 8 more years. We are going to add another $19 billion to subsidize illegal activity? In addition to that, Social Security entitlement benefits, welfare, Pell grants, student loans, all those would be added to the cost also.

Are there any funds to investigate whether someone is qualified? It may be that the average American hearing this debate says: These people came here at age 3. They should qualify for in-state tuition, even if they illegally came here. But those qualifications, coming here at that age, is not the requirement, first. No. 2, they only have to prove they have been in the country for 5 years. How do they prove it? They produce false documents. This is commonly done. How do they prove they came here at age 14, age 12? They may or may not have documents.

Do you think the FBI is going to take a document submitted to the immigration people to justify qualifications under the DREAM Act? Does anybody think the FBI is going to investigate to see if these are forged documents? Nobody is going to check this out; they don't have time. There is no money in the legislation to do so, no requirement that I can see to do so.

I know illegal immigration causes significant social and emotional problems throughout society. Some would say the way to remedy it is to not let anybody suffer any consequences as a result of violating the laws of the United States. Just don't enforce the laws. Reward the people who came in here illegally. Don't do anything about it.

Of course, on the surface that is untenable. But when you come up with a plan that simply says if you are in our country illegally, you don't qualify for in-state tuition, or you don't get subsidized student loans if you came into the country illegally, this is seen as harsh and mean spirited and should not occur. But great governments have to decide how they are going to conduct their business, and they have to decide whether we are going to end this lawlessness and have a lawful system of immigration.

This country, by the American people, has made up its mind. They have told the Congress what they want. But the arrogance, the total disrespect of the decent, honorable plea from the American people to end the lawlessness and create a system we can be proud of is surprising to me. I would think the Congress, after all we have been through, would have understood that the plea of the American people is not mean spirited. It is not unfair. It is quite legitimate and decent. We believe in immigration. We want immigrants to come to the country. We believe they should apply. We believe people who qualify should come here before people who do not qualify. That is what America is all about. That kind of legal system is one of the things that attracts people all over the world to come here. It should not be undermined.

If we do the right thing, we will reject this amendment. Hopefully, it will not even be brought up. Please, I hope it is not brought up. It is just going to cause a lot of frustration and tension on the Defense bill that ought to be focused on the men and women in harm's way and how to help them do their job better and more safely. I hope it does not come up. But if it does, it needs to be voted down. We need to tell the President, tell his Secretary of Homeland Security and his ICE department, tell Members of Congress we are tired of fooling around. Let's get busy and complete the job and create a lawful system of immigration of which we can be proud.

I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source