BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, today a group led by Chairman Grassley of the Senate Judiciary Committee formally introduced a bill to address the DACA issue--the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals issue--that we have heard so much about, as well as border security. I think it is a good starting point, and I am proud to be a cosponsor of the legislation, which is called the Secure and Succeed Act.

Perhaps the most important thing about this bill is that it actually has a good chance of becoming law. That is because the President supports it. It encompasses the four pillars the President has laid out for us in any solution to the DACA challenge.

The Secure and Succeed Act provides legal status and a pathway to citizenship for an estimated 1.8 million people who meet the specific criteria of DACA. This is a far larger number than the number of individuals covered by President Obama's Executive order. The fact is, this President has not only said to the 690,000 DACA recipients ``You are going to have a better, brighter future and a pathway to American citizenship''; this President has also offered all of the young people eligible but who might not have previously signed up that same opportunity. What an extraordinarily generous offer.

This bill also provides for a real plan to strengthen border security, utilizing the three things that Border Patrol has always told me are essential: more boots on the ground, better technology, and, yes, some infrastructure in hard-to-control locations, along with enhanced ports of entry.

I know there has been some confusion about that. The President likes to talk about the wall. It is true that back in roughly 2006 or 2007, Congress called for something called the Secure Fence Act, which got the support of then-Senator Obama, then-Senator Hillary Clinton, and, of course, current Senator Chuck Schumer. They supported the Secure Fence Act, as did an overwhelming majority of Senators from both parties.

When the President has talked about the wall, he has made pretty clear what he is really talking about is a barrier similar to what was supported on a bipartisan basis. He said that the Border Patrol is going to have to be able to see through it. Indeed, as he has conceded, in many places it doesn't make any sense at all to have a physical barrier. That is why technology and boots on the ground are so important.

This legislation also reallocates visas from the diversity lottery system in a way that is fair and continues the existing, family-based categories until the current backlog is cleared, which would take, probably, about 10 years. I am proud to cosponsor this commonsense solution. But I know other colleagues have been working hard on their ideas, which I look forward to reviewing as the debate continues.

One group I haven't heard from much, though, is our Democratic colleagues, who literally shut down the government to force this debate to occur on their terms and at a time they chose. We are still trying to figure out--OK, you won, in a sense. I think the American people lost when you shut down the government, but you made your point. You wanted a time certain and you wanted a fair process by which to present your ideas, and we have been waiting--here it is Wednesday, with the clock ticking, still waiting--for that Democratic proposal. What is their plan? What is their proposal? Do they even have one? And if they do, why are they leaving the rest of us, as well as the Nation, in the dark?

As the majority leader said yesterday, we need to stop trying to score political points and start making law. The way to get this done is to take a proposal like the President's and get started; people can offer amendments to that. Whatever gets 60 votes in the Senate passes the Senate, and then it is up to the House to pass it, and then it is up to the President to decide whether to sign it. He has pretty much given us the outline of what he would find acceptable. Again, insofar as it grants a pathway to citizenship for 1.8 million people, that is extraordinary in and of itself.

The majority leader made a commitment to hold this debate and to hold it this week. He has lived up to his promise, and now we can't let it all go to waste. As each minute and each hour clicks off the clock, it looks as if it is more and more likely to happen--that all of this will go to waste.

The country is watching. The DACA recipients in my home State--all 124,000 of them--are watching and worrying, understandably anxious about what their status is going to be when this program ends on March 5.

One of those DACA recipients is Julio Ramos, a biology teacher who is getting his master's degree in biomedical informatics. He is from Brownsville, TX, right along the U.S.-Mexico border, and he is a DACA recipient. After his mother was diagnosed with breast cancer, he decided he wanted to be a doctor. He has even been accepted to Texas medical schools, but he wasn't sure whether he would be allowed to attend. He is waiting and watching, worried about his future.

Then there is Miriam Santamaria from Houston, TX. She graduated from high school in Houston with honors. She paid her way through community college, and she works as a manager at a construction company and owns her own photography business. She sounds like quite an entrepreneur to me. Miriam said: ``I am not looking for any kind of recognition or sympathy, [I'm just] looking to make a difference and inspire others.'' She is also looking to live in peace in the only country that she has ever known and calls home. She came to the United States when she was 4 years old.

Finally, there is a man whom I will just call by the first name of Daniel. He, too, lives in Texas. He graduated from the University of North Texas with a degree in advertising and contributes productively to society. Daniel came from Mexico at the age of 2, and he said: ``All the choices I make, I made as an American, because that's what I am.''

We need to listen to these stories as we consider this legislation and as people are perhaps tempted into the political grandstanding and gamesmanship that, unfortunately, sometimes overwhelms our best intentions. These are real human lives hanging in the balance. They are important, and they teach us about the real people behind the policy.

But their stories are not the only ones we need to listen to. We need to listen to the stories of the men and women who have been waiting patiently for years to come here in a legal way through visas and green cards, waiting patiently to join their families here in the United States, doing it the old-fashioned, legal way. They have had to wait, some for years, some for decades.

We should listen to the stories of the border communities, which I am proud to represent in Texas, from men and women, many of whom are of Hispanic origin, who have suffered property damage from illegal immigration.

Illegal immigration is a pretty ugly business when you consider that it is in the hands of drug cartels and transnational criminal organizations. Recently, one of the military leaders who is responsible for Southern Command, which is Central America south, said that these transnational criminal organizations or cartels are ``commodity agnostic.'' That is the phrase he used. He said that they don't care whether it is people, drugs, or other contraband. What they are in it for is the money, and they are willing to do anything for the money. Unfortunately, victims of human trafficking know exactly what I am talking about.

Despite these hardships, businesses in many of the communities, like those along the border, are thriving. But we need to do everything we can to make sure that continues to be the case.

Sympathy for DACA recipients is right and good because, in America, we do not punish children for the mistakes of their parents, and we are not going to punish these young people who are now adults and have become part of our communities. But Americans who live along the border in my State realize that illegal immigration has caused real, tangible harm in terms of public safety, property damage, and their way of life.

When I talk to people like Manny Padilla, the Border Patrol's sector chief for the Rio Grande Valley, it is hard not to realize just how much is required and how many more resources we need to maintain situational awareness and operational control along the border.

I will say this: The Federal Government has failed over the years to live up to its responsibility to maintain the security of our border, so taxpayers in my State have to step up and fill the gap left by the failure of leadership of the Federal Government. But we have an opportunity to fix that in this legislation, following the parameters the President has laid out for us. That is why, during this week's debate, ensuring additional resources for border security is an essential piece of the puzzle. That includes areas other than between our ports of entry. Mexico is one of our largest trading partners. We have legitimate trade and commerce that flows back and forth across the border with Mexico and supports 5 million American jobs. Unfortunately, the cartels have figured out how to exploit that as well. So, because of antiquated infrastructure and technology at our ports of entry, many of them are vulnerable through the importation of poison--literally, drugs like methamphetamine, cocaine, heroin, and the like--that has taken the lives of so many Americans. We need to do more and better when it comes to maintaining those ports of entry--upgrading the infrastructure, improving the technology--so we can interdict more of that.

Again, the border is as varied as anyplace in the world, with areas that are flat and open, areas that have mountains and rolling hills, rivers, obviously. Technology, as we have come to see, has transformed our way of life, and technology can increasingly be the answer to supplement the boots on the ground and the infrastructure that the Border Patrol thinks are necessary.

There is a big difference between detecting illegal immigration in rural areas and urban ones. In urban areas, the Border Patrol tells us that you might have just a few seconds before someone can cross the border and enter into the United States. In large, open areas, there is more of a lag time, so perhaps a fence or some infrastructure is not as important; technology might be more important, along with the Border Patrol agents themselves.

My basic point is that border security is complex. For those who think it is as easy as one, two, three, I encourage you to do as some of my colleagues have done; that is, travel to the border--we will host you--to see firsthand why it is crucial that we strengthen our personnel, technology, and infrastructure. That has to be one of our priorities, and I am grateful to the President for making this one of his requirements as well.

We have an opportunity to address not only the anxiety and plight of DACA recipients but also to make our country safer and more secure; to reform our legal immigration system in a way that will help us accelerate the reunification of families out of the backlog of people waiting patiently and legally outside of the country to come into the country through legal immigration; and to address the President's concern about the roll of the dice in the diversity lottery that makes little sense, given our need for people with job-based skills, graduate degrees, and other merit-based criteria that would make them valuable to the United States, in addition to winning the lottery.

I hope we will take advantage of this opportunity this week. Time is wasting. It is Wednesday, and we don't have any time to waste at all.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source