Restoring Americans' Healthcare Freedom Reconciliation Act
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, for those who are keeping score, this is the 17th time that the Senate will be asked by the Republicans to vote to end ObamaCare, and they have added to this to defund Planned Parenthood. As one individual said the other day, here is a breakthrough press release: President Barack Obama is not going to end ObamaCare. That seems pretty obvious. So this is a political exercise. It doesn't solve the problems of America. It doesn't even address the problems of America.
The Affordable Care Act finds health insurance for 17 million Americans. We have reduced the number of uninsured Americans by 45 percent with this bill. The Republicans have opposed it from the start, never providing a single vote in support, never willing to sit down after it was passed to talk about changes that would make it even stronger or better. They want to end it. It is ObamaCare. It has the President's name on it--enough said for many of them. They want it to go away.
The reality is if it goes away, so does health insurance protection for millions of Americans. So you would expect that the Grand Old Party, the Republican Party, would have an alternative for us, right? Wrong. They have never come forward with any alternative that would provide coverage for these millions of Americans and the others who should have health insurance coverage as well. It just tells you that they are prepared to go back to the bad old days before ObamaCare and the Affordable Care Act.
Remember those days? Remember when a health insurance company could say to you: Sorry, you happen to have a sick child in your family, and we are not going to give you health insurance. Preexisting conditions were enough to say no, and if they said yes, it was at a premium that an average family couldn't even consider. We ended that discrimination against families and sick children. We ended it.
The Republicans today want to go back to those good old days when health insurance companies could turn you down in a New York minute and say: There will be no health insurance for you or your kids. They want to go back to those good old days. They are wrong.
They want to go back to the days when a family's health insurance plan wouldn't cover the graduate from college until he reached the age of 26. That is what the Affordable Care Act does. It says that a family can keep that youngster--young man or woman--on their health insurance plan for their family while they are looking for a job, serving an internship or have a part-time opportunity.
I will tell you, as a father who has raised three children, I can remember those days after college when those kids didn't have coverage, and I used to ask them about that. I asked my daughter, Jennifer: Do you have health insurance now? She said: Dad, I don't need it; I feel just fine. That is not what a father wants to hear. The Republicans want to return to those good old days when those young men and women, after just having graduated from college, had to buy their own health insurance and couldn't stay on the family plan.
What about senior citizens with prescription drugs? The Affordable Care Act, which they want to repeal, helped seniors pay for their prescription drugs. They want to go back to the bad old days when seniors had a gap in coverage and had to go to their lifesavings to buy lifesaving prescription drugs. Those are the good old days that the Republicans want to return to. Well, those days weren't so good, and they certainly shouldn't return.
We have seen for the last 5 years the slowest rate of increase in health care costs in the last several decades. We have slowed down that rate of growth. We can do better. We should work together to do better on a bipartisan basis.
But instead, we are faced with a 17th vote by Republicans in the Senate to eliminate ObamaCare, to return to the old days of discrimination because of preexisting conditions and to take your kids who have graduated from college off your family health insurance plan. That is what they want to go back to.
America is not going to let that happen. Thank goodness this President won't let that happen. But we are going to waste several days on the floor of the Senate while they go through speeches that have been carefully rehearsed and delivered 17 different times with the same ultimate result, and nothing is going to happen. Instead, they should join us in a bipartisan effort to make the Affordable Care Act even stronger, fairer, and to help people have affordability and access to health insurance.
SHOOTING IN SAN BERNARDINO
Mr. President, earlier today there was a mass shooting in San Bernardino, CA. News reports are saying that up to three heavily armed gunmen attacked a social services center that helps developmentally disabled people and their families in the community.
Preliminary reports say that there have been 14 people killed and 14 wounded, although we don't know the exact number yet. There are videos of wounded people actually lying in the streets. The suspects apparently fled the scene in a black SUV, and a manhunt is underway.
This story is horrific, but it is also horribly familiar. There have been over 350 mass shootings in America this year. On average, 297 Americans are shot every single day, 89 fatally. Listen to this grim and sad statistic: There have been over 50 school shootings this year in America.
Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims and first responders in San Bernardino. But they and all the victims across our country deserve more than our thoughts and prayers. They deserve action. It is time for Congress--in a level-headed, commonsense moment--to vote on and pass legislation to protect innocent people across America from this horrific gun violence.
SYRIAN REFUGEES
Mr. President, I don't know if it was George Washington who said--although I think he is given the credit--when describing this institution of the Senate: It is the saucer that cools the tea.
I served in the House for 14 years and was proud to do it. We were elected every 2 years. It was a more volatile atmosphere because we were constantly running for reelection. The Senate is a different institution, with 6-year terms and a little more reflection, I hope, in what we do. I hope that we take the time that is necessary to exercise our constitutional opportunity here and think things over clearly and not react emotionally.
Well, it was about 2 weeks ago when the House of Representatives took action on the Syrian refugees and passed a measure that would give what they called a pause to receiving Syrian refugees in the United States. It was a heated moment. It was after the terrible tragedies that occurred in Paris and Beirut, and there were concerns about ISIL and the spread of their terrorist ways around the world. It was an emotional moment that really needs some reflection.
The simple fact of the matter is this. Over the last 4 years, during the course of the Syrian war, the United States has received about 2,000 refugees from Syria into our country. It is an elaborate, lengthy process.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have an article from last weekend's New York Times, which outlines all of the steps that need to be taken in order for a Syrian refugee to enter the United States, printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
[From the New York Times, Nov. 20, 2015]
Why It Takes Two Years for Syrian Refugees To Enter the U.S.
(By Haeyoun Park and Larry Buchanan)
Syrians must pass many layers of security checks before being admitted to the United States, a process that can take two years or longer. In most cases, the refugees do not enter the United States until the very end. They are also subject to an additional layer of checks beyond those for refugees of other nationalities; after the Paris attacks, the House voted to further tighten screening procedures. Since 2011, the United States has admitted fewer than 2,000 Syrian refugees.
1. Registration with the United Nations.
2. Interview with the United Nations.
3. Refugee status granted by the United Nations.
4. Referral for resettlement in the United States. The United Nations decides if the person fits the definition of a refugee and whether to refer the person to a country for resettlement. Only the most vulnerable are referred, accounting for fewer than 1 percent of refugees worldwide. Some people spend years waiting in refugee camps.
5. Interview with State Department contractors.
6. First background check.
7. Higher-level background check for some.
8. Another background check. The refugee's name is run through law enforcement and intelligence databases for terrorist or criminal history. Some go through a higher-level clearance before they can continue. A third background check was introduced in 2008 for Iraqis but has since been expanded to all refugees ages 14 to 65.
9. First fingerprint screening; photo taken.
10. Second fingerprint screening.
11. Third fingerprint screening. The refugee's fingerprints are screened against F.B.I. and Homeland Security databases, which contain watch list information and past immigration encounters, including if the refugee previously applied for a visa at a United States embassy. Fingerprints are also checked against those collected by the Defense Department during operations in Iraq.
12. Case reviewed at United States immigration headquarters.
13. Some cases referred for additional review. Syrian applicants must undergo these two additional steps. Each is reviewed by a United States Citizenship and Immigration Services refugee specialist. Cases with ``national security indicators'' are given to the Homeland Security Department's fraud detection unit.
14. Extensive, in-person interview with Homeland Security officer. Most of the interviews with Syrian refugees have been done in Amman, Jordan and in Istanbul.
15. Homeland Security approval is required. If the House bill becomes law, the director of the F.B.I., the Homeland Security secretary and the director of national intelligence would be required to confirm that the applicant poses no threat.
16. Screening for contagious diseases.
17. Cultural orientation class.
18. Matched with an American resettlement agency.
19. Multi-agency security check before leaving for the United States. Because of the long amount of time between the initial screening and departure, officials conduct a final check before the refugee leaves for the United States.
20. Final security check at an American airport.
Sources: State Department; Department of Homeland Security; Center for American Progress; U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants.
Mr. DURBIN. It starts with registration with the United Nations, interview with the United Nations, refugee status granted by the United Nations, referral for resettlement in the United States, interview with State Department contractors, the first background check, higher level background checks, another background check, fingerprint screening with a photo taken, the second fingerprint screening, the third fingerprint screening, the case reviewed by U.S. immigration headquarters and then in some cases referred for additional review, extensive in-person interviews with Homeland Security officers, and then--and only then--could Homeland Security approval be required. At that point the potential refugee is screened for contagious diseases, goes through a cultural orientation class, matched with an American resettlement agency, goes through a multiagency security check before leaving to enter the United States, and then faces a final security check when they arrive at an American airport.
I am entering this into the Record because those who are suggesting that we are taking Syrian refugees without appropriate screening are not aware of the reality. It is a process that takes 18 to 24 months, and in the 4 years we have accepted about 2,000 Syrian refugees, not a single one has been found to be involved in a terrorist activity.
We accept about 70,000 refugees in the United States each year, and I am glad that we do because for some people in some parts of the world, it is the only place they can turn to.
The public reaction against the House action that bars Syrian refugees is interesting. There was a Congressman, and I don't know him personally, but his name is Congressman Steve Russell of Oklahoma.
This is according to the POLITICO article:
He voted for the bill with serious reservations but in the hopes of affecting the debate as it moved ahead. If the existing bill were to come before the House again, ``I would vote against it,'' Russell said. ``I think it creates impossible barriers to refugees.''
Just 2 weeks ago, he voted for it, but he has thought it over. Why? This article says:
For Russell, the issue is personal. One of his close friends is an American citizen who was trying to get his mother out of Syria. The mother died this past summer before she could leave that war-torn country. Out of respect for his friend's privacy, [Congressman] Russell [of Oklahoma], a retired Army lieutenant colonel, declined to offer specifics, including exactly what happened to the woman. But he said: ``I'm certain had he been able to get her to the United States, she would still be alive.''
[Congressman] Russell urged [his fellow] Republicans in the Senate to think carefully before supporting the House bill, saying they should not get refugees confused with the broader issue of immigration. He pointed out that in the past the U.S. has denied entry to people in need of help, including Jews [who were] fleeing the Nazis [in Europe during World War II].
``We have had dark periods when we have done this in the past,'' he said. ``History never judges it kindly--never.''
That was a quote by Congressman Russell, a Republican from the State of Oklahoma.
I think it is important to note, too, that ``in a letter to lawmakers released [yesterday], a group of national security experts, including figures prominent in Republican circles such as former Secretary of State [Henry] Kissinger, retired Gen. David Petraeus and former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, urged [us] to stop the House bill.''
``Refugees are victims, not perpetrators of terrorism,'' the signatories wrote. ``Categorically refusing to take them only feeds the narrative of [the Islamic State] that there is a war between Islam and the West, that Muslims are not welcome in the United States and Europe, and that the [Islamic State] caliphate is their true home.''
Perhaps the saucer is cooling the tea, and perhaps the Senate will have the good sense not to follow the action of the House of Representatives in passing this provision.
I have two other items to add to the Record before I yield the floor to my colleagues who have gathered here today.
The first is an article that comes out of the city of Chicago, which I am honored to represent. I ask unanimous consent that the article be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
[From the Chicagoist.com, Dec. 1, 2015]
Meet the Nuns Who Are Preparing Their West Ridge Home To Take in Syrian Refugees
(By Tony Boylan)
Three nuns living in West Ridge plan to take in a Syrian refugee family not just with the blessing of their local community, but at its urging.
Despite Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner's decision last month to join a number of other state governors in vowing to make it tougher for Syrian refugees to resettle in the U.S. in the wake of a recent terrorist attack on Paris, these women are preparing their home to make life a little easier for a refugee family.
The sisters, part of the Society of Helpers, live in a historic home once owned by the Dr. Scholl's Family with a finished basement they in the process of turning into a family apartment. The Society is an international order with progressive values based on the teachings of St. Ignatius. In other words, they get their hands dirty working with lots of issues other people of faith aren't always quick to embrace; the homeless, addicts, teenage mothers, domestic violence and those most in need of support and assistance.
From their mission statement: ``As contemplatives in action, we don't just pray for social justice and for peace--we make it our life's work.''
Putting their faith in action, the sisters moved swiftly to ready themselves to provide shelter to a refugee family they think could be with them as soon as January. Political leaders can debate and demagogue on the issue all they'd like, but the sisters don't care about that. Their faith declares what it declares, they say, and offering help is their faith.
``We would rather not make our decision on fear, we would rather make our decision on compassion,'' said Sister Mary Ellen Moore, a registered psychologist and one of three nuns who lives in the house. ``We were certainly disappointed in Gov. Rauner's statement on this issue. That kind of mentality if frightening and we know what it's led to in Europe and in other places in the past. It's really very sad.''
The plan predates the attacks in Paris, which have somehow been blamed on refugees--the same people trying to flee the horrific powers behind the carnage. The nuns and the members of St. Gertrude's parish in Edgewater took to heart the Pope's call for every congregation in America to help ease the international crisis and find a way to accommodate refugees.
The sisters do find it important to note that this isn't an entirely free ride. Refugee families from Syria, or anywhere else, are required as part of their status to obtain work almost immediately after getting settled. Catholic Charities will assist them with that. The family will also be asked to contribute something for electricity and other utilities in due time, and after a store of donated food is exhausted, the family will rely on its own income and some help from charity for food.
In this case, though, a family couldn't ask for hosts more qualified and prepared to help them assimilate. And the sisters think the multicultural nature of their neighborhood--near Devon Avenue and Loyola University--will be helpful.
Members of the parish, where the sisters attend church, but have no official attachment, almost immediately began collecting donations of money, furniture, bedding, kitchen supplies, and all the mundane things a family starting over with nothing might need to get by. (There still is a need for everything except clothing, which will wait until they know who is coming and can collect items appropriate to ages and size. Any help is appreciated and can be donated through either the Society of Helpers Facebook Page or website.
It's not as if the parishioners or sisters are entering into this without thinking through any potential risks. It's just that they know the risks are being wildly overstated and their mission is clear.
A letter written by parishioner John Neafsey was circulated among church members recently read, in part:
``Security concerns are understandable in the aftermath of the Paris attacks. But our understanding is that there is already a thorough and lengthy screening process in place for checking the backgrounds of refugees (agreed upon between the UNHCR and host countries, including the U.S.) prior to approving them for resettlement to the United States. We believe that an arbitrary refusal to allow Syrian refugees to come to our state is unnecessary, unfair, and un-Christian. This would needlessly scapegoat and penalize innocent men, women, and children who are fleeing violence and persecution. It deprives them of the chance to get a new start in a safe place where they are welcome. The motto of our parish is `All Are Welcome.' For us, ``all'' includes Syrian refugees, whether they are Christian or Muslim.''
While neither the church members nor the sisters want this matter to be political, they understand the climate that has been created.
``It's very sad people just jump to judgement because people are different,'' said Sr. Jean Kielty, Director of the House of Good Shepherd and a social worker who has aided the homeless for a quarter century. She shares the house with Sister Mary Ellen, Sister Anna Maria Baldauf, and their dogs, Mocha and Snowball.
``This is just a different kind of homelessness--a more tragic one.''
There is a one ramification Sister Jean is concerned about, though: ``I'm not sure if my family will come visit me anymore.''
Here's a little more information about the nuns behind this initiative and the residence where they are providing a basement apartment to a refugee family next year:
JEAN KIELTY, SH
As a social worker, Jean's ministry has focused on addressing homelessness in the Chicagoland area for more than 25 years. She has served as Director of Interim Housing with Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Chicago and is currently the Executive Program Director of the House of Good Shepherd. Jean is the founder and current chairperson of the board for Casa Esperanza, a transitional housing program for women and their children located in South Chicago. Jean is one of three leaders of the U.S. Province of the Society of Helpers and resides in her West Ridge home with two other Helpers and their dogs.
MARY ELLEN MOORE, SH, PH.D.
Mary Ellen is a registered psychologist and co-founder of Claret Center in Hyde Park that offers psychotherapy, workshops, and professional development that support wholeness in mind, body, and spirit. In addition to her advisory role at Claret Center, Mary Ellen provides psychotherapy and supervision to clients and students and is the director of training for the practicum at ``The Circle,'' a Helpers-sponsored resource center for Latina immigrant women in Brighton Park. Mary Ellen served served two previous terms as the Helpers' U.S. Provincial from 1985-1995 and another term from 2008-2014.
THE MILLER HOUSE
This West Ridge modified Georgian Colonial Revival was built by the Hutchins Brothers in 1911. In 1923, the Hutchins family sold the home to Frank Scholl, brother of Dr. William M. Scholl who founded the company Dr. Scholl's. Frank joined the business in 1910 and oversaw European operations. Featured on the 1996 Annual Fall House Tour and the 2013 Annual House Tour, this historical home boasts 5000 square feet with 5 bedrooms, 5.5 bathrooms and related living quarters.
Although this ``large home'' has undergone changes with each of the five previous owners, it maintains many qualities of its original historic charm. The Society of Helpers purchased the home in 2014, planning to utilize its space to welcome other Helpers visiting from around the world. They were thrilled to be able to offer the related living quarters to a Syrian refugee family when their parish, St. Gertrude, and Catholic Charities provided an opportunity to present a family in need of a safe home.
Mr. DURBIN. The article talks about a house in West Ridge, Chicago. It is a place where an order of Catholic nuns called the Society of Helpers has a house that they have turned into a refuge for homeless people. They have announced that they are going to accept Syrian refugees into their home so that the refugees know they will have a safe place to stay in the United States.
Sister Mary Ellen Moore, a registered psychologist and one of the nuns who lives in the house, said:
We would rather not make our decision on fear, we would rather make it on compassion ..... We were certainly disappointed in Gov. Rauner's statement on this issue. That kind of mentality is frightening and we know what it's led to in Europe and other places in the past. It's really very sad.
The people of France, after these horrific terrorist incidents, announced that they are going to accept 30,000 Syrian refugees. The people of Canada, after the terrible incident in Paris, announced virtually the same thing. And what has been the response of the United States and the House of Representatives? It has been an irrational response of fear.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that this letter, which comes from a group called HIAS, and has the headline ``1000 Rabbis in Support of Welcoming Refugees'' be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
[From hias.org, Dec. 1, 2015]
1,000 Rabbis in Support of Welcoming Refugees
We, Rabbis from across the country, call on our elected officials to exercise moral leadership for the protection of the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program.
Since its founding, the United States has offered refuge and protection to the world's most vulnerable. Time and time again, those refugees were Jews. Whether they were fleeing pogroms in Tzarist Russia, the horrors of the Holocaust or persecution in Soviet Russia or Iran, our relatives and friends found safety on these shores.
We are therefore alarmed to see so many politicians declaring their opposition to welcoming refugees.
Last month's heartbreaking attacks in Paris and Beirut are being cited as reasons to deny entry to people who are themselves victims of terror. And in those comments, we, as Jewish leaders, see one of the darker moments of our history repeating itself.
In 1939, the United States refused to let the S.S. St. Louis dock in our country, sending over 900 Jewish refugees back to Europe, where many died in concentration camps. That moment was a stain on the history of our country--a tragic decision made in a political climate of deep fear, suspicion and antisemitism. The Washington Post released public opinion polling from the early 1940's, showing that the majority of U.S. citizens did not want to welcome Jewish refugees to this country in those years.
In 1939, our country could not tell the difference between an actual enemy and the victims of an enemy. In 2015, let us not make the same mistake.
We therefore urge our elected officials to support refugee resettlement and to oppose any measures that would actually or effectively halt resettlement or prohibit or restrict funding for any groups of refugees.
As Rabbis, we take seriously the biblical mandate to ``welcome the stranger.'' We call on our elected officials to uphold the great legacy of a country that welcomes refugees.
Mr. DURBIN. I will close by reading just a portion of this letter that was handed to me this morning by this group that represents these Jewish rabbis all across the United States, from virtually every State in the Union.
It says:
We, Rabbis from across the country, call on our elected officials to exercise moral leadership for the protection of the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program.
Since its founding, the United States has offered refuge and protection to the world's most vulnerable. Time and time again, those refugees were Jews. Whether fleeing the pogroms in Tzarist Russia, the horrors of the Holocaust or persecution in Soviet Russia or Iran, our relatives and friends found safety on these shores.
We are therefore alarmed to see so many politicians declaring their opposition to welcoming refugees.
Last month's heartbreaking attacks in Paris and Beirut are being cited as reasons to deny entry to people who are themselves victims of terror. And in those comments, we, as Jewish leaders, see one of the darker moments of our history repeating itself.
They go on to talk about the United States turning away the SS St. Louis in 1939, and 900 Jews were sent back to Europe. The Holocaust Museum tells us that 200 of them perished in the Holocaust because the United States refused to accept them as refugees.
They end by saying:
As Rabbis, we take seriously the biblical mandate to ``welcome the stranger.'' We call on our elected officials to uphold the great legacy of a country that welcomes refugees.
I yield the floor.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source