Border Security and Immigration Reform Act of 2018

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I strongly oppose H.R. 6136. Far from being the moderate and compromise bill that has been advertised, this bill is extreme and unreasonable. This bill eliminates the diversity visa program and cuts off even children and brothers and sisters from reunifying with their families.

The bill even revokes the approval of over 3 million family members who have been waiting for years to reunify with their U.S. citizen brothers, sisters, and parents.

While it claims to end President Trump's cruel family separation policy, nothing in the bill actually prohibits family separation or limits criminal prosecutions. And the bill requires the long-term detention of families and children while actually removing requirements that detention facilities be safe, sanitary, and appropriate for children.

It eliminates important asylum protections and would protect many bona fide asylum seekers from even applying for protection in the first place.

In addition, this legislation spends $23.4 billion to fund Donald Trump's offensive and unnecessary border wall.

Finally and most importantly, this bill fails to provide a certain path to citizenship for the Dreamers.

Donald Trump created havoc when he made the decision to strip legal status from young Americans who were brought to the U.S. as young children and who know only this country as their own. The Republican leadership repeatedly announced that they intended to protect the Dreamers. Now we see their supposed solution, and it is a half measure at best that leaves far too many Dreamers behind.

The bill's stringent eligibility requirements would likely cut off millions of Dreamers from eligibility to the bill's legalization program. To those who would be eligible, the bill establishes a long and difficult road to permanent residence, never mind to citizenship. Because of the limited number of visas made available, it would force applicants to wait for up to 23 years for permanent residence.

Most appalling, if even $1 of border wall funding is ever transferred or rescinded by a future Congress, the long and difficult path to permanent residence would be canceled entirely. This would effectively hold the Dreamers hostage to every future appropriations battle.

Now, we know the Republicans refer to this bill as a compromise, but it is not a compromise when you excluded the Democrats from negotiations.

There is, in fact, a compromise bipartisan bill, the Hurd-Aguilar bill, that actually provides a meaningful path to citizenship for Dreamers and doesn't bog the bill down in different considerations about the wall or about diversity visas or about family legislation. Those are separate issues and should be debated separately if you want to redeem your promise to the Dreamers.

This bill is hypocritical, because it doesn't redeem the promise to the Dreamers and bogs it down in other issues, which we know will probably result in the bill never going anywhere.

Do not be fooled by this legislation. It is not moderate, it is not a compromise, it does not solve the Dreamer issue. It reflects the Republican majority's decision to keep a real Dreamer bill, the Hurd- Aguilar bill, off the floor.

It is yet one more extreme measure by the Republican majority that fails to solve the real issues plaguing our immigration system and betrays the promise to the Dreamers.

Madam Speaker, I urge all Members to oppose this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren), the distinguished ranking member of the Immigration Subcommittee.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman an additional 30 seconds.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Johnson), a distinguished member of the Judiciary Committee.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.

Madam Speaker, the President of the United States and the Speaker of the House promised to solve the problem of the Dreamers and to give them a path to citizenship. This bill does not do that except for 23 years, and it makes them hostage to other things such as the gentleman from Georgia talked about.

We do not agree, many of us, that we should go away from family-based unification. We do not agree on the four pillars. The President agrees with that. Some of the Republicans agree with that. We ought to debate that separately and have a bill that takes care of the Dreamers, as the President and the Speaker promised, instead of holding them hostage to all these other things that we don't agree to and that shouldn't be held hostage. We should have a clean DACA bill like Hurd-Aguilar.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from California (Ms. Roybal-Allard).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Will the House vote on this measure tonight?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, will the House vote tomorrow?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, can the Chair advise when the House will vote on the measure?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, under the rule, the minority, the Democrats, are entitled the offer one final amendment in the form of a motion to recommit.

Mr. Speaker, when will we have that opportunity?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, we normally have that opportunity during debate.

Mr. Speaker, will we have that opportunity in debate tonight?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I understand that.

Mr. Speaker, will we have the opportunity, as part of that debate, to offer the amendment in the form of a motion to recommit, as is our right during debate?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I take it that we will be able to offer that motion to recommit before we finish debate tonight.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, you didn't answer my question, sir.

Mr. Speaker, we are, of course, entertaining debate on the bill now. The motion to recommit is part of that debate, and my question is: Will we be permitted to offer that motion to recommit before we finish debate tonight?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, there may be.

Mr. Speaker, if the Chair can't answer, perhaps the chairman of the committee can answer that question about the motion to recommit.

Mr. Chairman?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, can the chairman perhaps comment on when the House will vote on this bill?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, for what purpose are we debating this bill tonight if we cannot guarantee when or if we will vote?

Let me rephrase the question.

Mr. Speaker, can the Chair guarantee that we will, in fact, vote on this bill at some point?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I am asking the Acting Speaker right now. I think the mace is up, so Speaker.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, we are entertaining debate on the bill, obviously, but can the Chair guarantee that we will, in fact, vote on this bill at some point? Otherwise, why are we wasting time?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, can the Chair guarantee that we will have the opportunity, as guaranteed under the rules, to offer our motion to recommit, whether or not we ever vote on this bill?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, the Chair will not guarantee that the rule will be adhered to and give us the opportunity to offer that motion?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, the Chair is being very forthcoming.

Mr. Speaker, I do assume that we will have the opportunity to offer our motion to recommit.

Mr. Speaker, I further assume that at some point we will vote on this bill, otherwise, everything the majority has said about why it is being offered would be a little less than honest.

Mr. Speaker, this supposed compromise bill is a sham. It fails to cover all Dreamers or to provide them with a certain path to citizenship. It fails to end the Trump family separation policy. It revokes critical protections for detained children and families. It eliminates important asylum protections. It makes communities less safe, and it slashes legal family immigration.

At every step of the way, this bill attacks family unity. It attacks immigrant communities, it attacks common decency, and it evades fulfilling the pledge of the Speaker and the President that we will solve the problem and allow a path to citizenship for the Dreamers.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a report by the Cato Institute titled: ``House GOP Bill Cuts Legal Immigration by 1.4 Million Over 20 Years.''

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to oppose the bill.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source