Energy and Water, Legislative Branch, and Military Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Act, 2019

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, on Friday, I traveled to the Rio Grande Valley, right along the U.S.-Mexico border, expecting the front-page news to be about separation of families when our immigration laws were being enforced. Imagine my surprise when the front page of the newspapers in the Rio Grande Valley were talking about the flooding in South Texas.

We heard that late last week, more than 200 water rescues were performed on the border city of Mission alone, and some areas were pounded by more than 15 inches of rain over a 4-day period. Cities in South Texas, such as Harlingen, Mercedes, Weslaco, Brownsville, and others, were affected. I saw it myself when I was in the Valley last week. A feeder road and entire soccer fields were underwater, and county officials were out surveying flood damage around the airport. This has been especially tough news because some of the coastal areas in my State that were impacted by this flood were also hit by Hurricane Harvey less than a year ago and are still recovering from that catastrophe. Just as life started to get back to normal--whatever normal is--the rains came.

As hurricane season is now underway, we will continue to monitor the weather and the conditions there that may arise throughout the remainder of the summer months and to work with all of my constituents and leaders at the local, State, and Federal level to make sure we are as prepared as we can humanly be for the next adverse weather event. Keep Families Together and Enforce the Law Act

As I said, Mr. President, I went to the border to talk about immigration and family separation policies. I traveled there to tour two facilities in Brownsville, along with Senator Cruz, that housed young children--some very young and some up to 18, just under 18 years of age--who are being sheltered after their parents crossed illegally into the United States.

It is important to note that in so many respects, life is pretty good in the Rio Grande Valley. Business is booming. Men and women are working hard, going to school, paying their bills, just like the rest of us. It is not all the Wild Wild West, as the press sometimes makes it out to be.

When it comes to immigrant shelters, I think it is very important that we learn what the facts are rather than continue a narrative that has very little basis in fact.

The truth is, the surge of humanity coming across our southern border is nothing new. This year so far--since October 1--there have been roughly 32,000 unaccompanied children who have come across the border, more than 50,000 families, but all told, the Border Patrol has detained roughly 250,000 people coming across our southwestern border.

I know that here in Washington, you could be forgiven for thinking ``Well, the border is not a problem. Illegal immigration is not a problem,'' but I am here to say it is a problem, and it is a national security threat. The humanitarian crisis we have seen at the border because countries like those in Central America continue to send their young children up across the border into the United States--it creates a huge challenge for us, just as it did in 2014 when President Obama called it a humanitarian crisis, because, frankly, our communities along the border and the Federal Government are not prepared to deal with such an influx of humanity, particularly those who need to be taken care of in a compassionate and humane way, especially the children who come across the border.

Why are children coming across the border unaccompanied and in some instances with family units? Because the cartels--the criminal organizations that profit from a business model that allows them to exploit vulnerabilities in American law, particularly when it comes to border security--are making millions of dollars trafficking in humanity. They don't just traffic in illegal immigration; they traffic in those who would ply these immigrants for sex trafficking, those who would distribute drugs illegally in the United States, particularly heroin, an opioid, along with fentanyl, coming across the border, perhaps even from China, which is part of the opioid crisis in the United States.

As one gentleman who has a lot of experience in the area phrased it-- he said that when it comes to what the cartels and the criminal organizations will transport into the United States, they are commodity agnostic. What he meant by that, I gathered, is that what it is all about is the money. It is the money these large criminal organizations earn trafficking in people, trafficking in drugs, trafficking in contraband across our southwestern border that represents such a challenge to our government officials at the local level, at the State level, and, of course, at the national level.

I know there has been a lot of misinformation about what happens at the border when somebody comes to the border and claims asylum. There are accepted procedures and legal standards that should be applied when somebody comes from another country and claims a credible fear of persecution because of who they are--their race, their religion, and the like.

As Secretary Nielsen, the Secretary of Homeland Security, pointed out, it is not a crime to come to a port of entry--that is, one of the bridges--and ask for asylum. It is a crime for an adult to try to cross the border between those ports of entry into the United States, and that is why we end up with this huge challenge of what to do when they come across with a minor child with them.

After touring these facilities in Brownsville and meeting with various Federal agency officials, nongovernmental organizations, and local elected officials at the Weslaco Border Patrol Station, what we learned is that this situation is far more complex than meets the eye and that many of the narratives that have been spun about what is happening at the border are simply false or may be based in part on fact but in part on nonfactual information.

What we did was we had the Federal officials at the Weslaco Border Patrol Station go through the step-by-step process of what happens to immigrant families when they are apprehended at the border, what happens when they are detained, and what happens when their cases are heard in a court. This is very useful information, and I want to particularly credit Rio Grande Valley Border Patrol Chief Manny Padilla, Custom and Border Patrol's David Higgerson, and all the men and women on the frontlines who are doing a great job under very difficult circumstances across the border.

I am glad to know that the processes are changing based on the Executive order President Trump issued last week. That order stated that immigrant families should be detained together when appropriate and consistent with law and available resources. The problem is that I am not sure anybody could be prepared for this influx of humanity coming across the border, but they are doing the very best they can.

We know that Executive orders are always subject to legal challenges. We in Congress have introduced legislation to make sure that if, in fact, the President's Executive order ordering families to be kept together is somehow challenged or found deficient in court, that we have legislation to back it up. It is important that we in Congress make clear in statute that the status quo along the border cannot continue.

That status quo has resulted in family members being separated from one another--in some cases, young children from their parents, which is something I know we all want to avoid. We know that in many cases, these children have remained in close touch with their parents throughout the course of their detention. But we still need to make sure these families are kept together where possible.

I, along with a number of my colleagues on this side of the aisle, led by the junior Senator from North Carolina, Mr. Tillis, introduced a piece of legislation last week to address this situation. It is called the Keep Families Together and Enforce the Law Act. As the title of the bill suggests, there are two parts.

Treating families with compassion by allowing them to remain together and enforcing our immigration laws don't have to be mutually exclusive, and our bill will ensure that they aren't. It will allow children to stay with their parents in a safe facility while they await their court proceedings to see if they perhaps are eligible for some sort of immigration benefit, like asylum. Our bill will also set mandatory standards for care in family residential centers where immigrant families are placed and keep children safe by requiring they be removed from the care of any individual who presents a danger to them.

Just as importantly, it provides additional resources. It will require more than 200 new immigration judges and require the Department of Homeland Security to expedite the court proceedings of families and children. We don't want those family units to remain in detention any longer than necessary to present their case to an immigration judge.

Some have rightfully asked questions about the families who have already been separated. What happens now that the kids have been placed apart from their parents? Our bill requires the administration to take steps to reunify as many families as possible who remain in ICE's, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or HHS's, Health and Human Services, custody.

Believe it or not, as part of this disinformation or misinformation that seems to pervade this topic, some have falsely claimed that our bill promotes the indefinite detention of families, but that is certainly not the intention. Our bill does not mandate the Department of Homeland Security detain parents and their kids together indefinitely. It, simply, removes an arbitrary, court-imposed rule that says families can be held together for no more than 20 days. This is from the so-called Flores case.

In many instances, allowing families to remain together in custody for more than 20 days will allow immigration courts to process their claims faster so that they will literally have better access to justice. Generally, immigrants are detained only until their proceedings in front of immigration judges are completed. So those who claim that the bill would somehow promote the indefinite detention of these families, simply, aren't telling you the truth. These families will remain in residential shelters only until their court proceedings are completed, but we need to prioritize these cases, in particular--to move them to the head of the line--so that these families will not have to wait any longer than necessary.

Other proposals have been put forward in addition to the Tillis proposal. One of the most prominent is the one being offered by our friend, the senior Senator from California. I have worked together on many issues with Senator Feinstein, but on this issue, I think her bill has a number of problems. In fact, there is a huge question of what sort of enforcement, if any, would be permitted under her bill. In effect, this bill would make it impossible to criminally prosecute parents for crossing the border illegally unless their children were able to go into Department of Justice's custody with the parents. This bill doesn't even specify where the families should be held. That is a big problem because children shouldn't go to jails and prisons, run by the Department of Justice, that have hardened, potentially violent criminals.

I don't know anybody who thinks that that is a good idea. That is why, essentially, the bill advocates for catch and release. Nowhere does the bill say where these families should be held since they can't go into the Department of Justice's facilities. Basically, the only alternative left up to immigration enforcement officials is to let them go and issue them notices to appear at future court dates. The bill specifically forces the Department of Homeland Security to release family units without exception, which prevents potential criminals from being prosecuted. Again, it is the adults we are talking about, not the children.

Chief Padilla, the Chief of the Rio Grande Valley sector of the Border Patrol, which is the most active part of the southwestern border, said: If you look at the surges in illegal immigration over recent history, the highest surges in illegal immigration are when the U.S. Government has had a policy of catching and then releasing people who have violated the immigration laws and has ordered them to appear in the future. Of course, most of the people don't show up in the future. They know they will rarely be followed up on and rarely be caught unless, of course, they commit some other crime or offense and are picked up by local police, at which time U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's and local law enforcement's records are matched in order to identify those people.

To suggest that we should not enforce our immigration laws or to suggest that we should catch people who violate those laws and release them and have them appear on future dates, which is far from certain, is itself a huge encouragement and inducement to surges in illegal immigration. One of the main reasons is that the cartels--again, the criminal organizations that control much of the human trafficking, the illegal drug trafficking, and the movement of immigrants across the border--are very smart, and they know when there are gaps in the U.S. Government's policy that can be exploited, like catch and release.

I am not sure everyone who supports the bill that Senator Feinstein has proposed understands what the consequences are of the legislation. Where are the provisions that allow us to enforce our immigration laws? Both of our bills allow for families to be kept together while they are waiting for court proceedings, but only one of them, the Tillis bill, also permits the enforcement of our laws. That seems to be the choice that our Democratic colleagues have made.

With all due respect to our Democratic colleagues, their legislation, simply, doesn't cut it. I don't think the American people will tolerate a situation in which our borders remain open, essentially, to the poison shipped over here from the drug traffickers, to the human trafficking by which people are, simply, sold into modern-day slavery, or whether open borders is used as a way to transport people illegally from one country to another.

We want to make it clear that families should be kept together but, also, that we will enforce the law even when that requires families be held in government custody for a short period of time pending their court hearings. We also want to be clear that where they should be held is in safe residential family housing and away from hardened, potentially violent criminals.

Again, the legislation, which has been proffered by our friend from California, doesn't mandate that. Basically, it just prevents us from enforcing our laws. It promotes catch and release, and it doesn't specify where families should be held together, which could jeopardize the safety of these children.

With these and other shortcomings, I think the much better option is the bill that our Republican colleagues and I, along with Senator Tillis, have introduced. I hope the discussions which, I know, have been planned between Senator Durbin, Senator Feinstein, Senator Tillis, and Senator Cruz--perhaps as early as today--are very productive. It would be important to achieve both important goals at once--the continued enforcement of our immigration laws and the unification of families.

I have become disturbed by what I have seen on social media. There is a hashtag in social media called ``abolish ICE,'' abolish the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. I have read where one Democratic House Member has actually introduced legislation that would abolish our immigration enforcement agency, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Basically, what that would do is to create an open invitation to the criminal organizations that facilitate illegal immigration, drugs, and other contraband. There will be no limit to the number of people who will be able to enter the country illegally. We will just wave them on through.

In addition to the open borders, which is no solution, there are colleagues who are advocating this sort of notion, who have no plan of how to deal with the influx of humanity, whether it is from a health and safety or a safe and secure facilities perspective. I think it is a half-baked idea and one we should reject.

I urge our colleagues on both sides of the aisle to continue talking and to support the legislation that Senator Tillis and I and others have introduced.

I would like to see the Senate take swift action. I wish we could have done it last week because we all agree that families should be kept together, and we all agree that this is an emergency situation. We must act quickly. If we come together, we can resolve this situation swiftly and ensure these children will be kept with their families, which is our No. 1 priority.

It is also a priority of all of us to enforce the laws that are on the books and not to, basically, benefit the business model of the drug cartels in the process and see them continue to prey on young, susceptible, vulnerable people who are willing to risk it all just to make their way to the United States, to our borders.

Recognition of the Minority Leader

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Flake), the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Graham), the Senator from Georgia (Mr. Isakson), the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain, and the Senator from Alaska (Mr. Sullivan).

Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Georgia (Mr. Isakson) would have voted ``yea.''

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source