Executive Session
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, on Monday, I was in El Paso, TX, to talk with some of my constituents about the challenges that exist along our southwest border and how we can work together to address them.
It is almost surreal to have people here in Washington, DC, who have never been to the border and whose, perhaps, only supposed knowledge is from novels they have read or movies they have seen. Having spent quite a bit of time along the border of Texas and Mexico, myself, I can tell you it is a unique part of our country and certainly a unique part of my State.
The people you learn the most from are not the elected officials who serve here in Washington but rather from the Border Patrol, the sheriffs, the mayors, and countless others who live and work along the border. They can provide, I think, the kind of expert knowledge that we need in order to address the challenges that exist.
What they tell me and what I have learned is that there is no one- size-fits-all, because you can look at urban environments, like El Paso, or you can go out to Big Bend, which has thousands-of-feet-high cliffs overlooking the Rio Grande. Obviously, a physical barrier in one place, like in highly trafficked urban areas, is one situation, but putting it atop a 3,000-foot cliff is another. So no one-size-fits-all solution works.
That is why it is important to listen to the stakeholders who live and work in these communities, and this is key to actually doing something with the feedback they provide. What I have constantly been reminded of is that border security is a combination of three parts: physical barriers in some hard-to-control locations, personnel, and technology. What is best for a high-trafficked urban area, as I said, is probably much different than what is good for the vast expanses between the ports of entry. Figuring out what we need or where we need it is not a decision that ought to be micromanaged in Washington. It should come from the experts who know the threats and challenges along every mile of the border.
While I was in El Paso, we also talked--as we must--about the important role the border plays with our economy. Border communities in Texas depend on people and goods moving legally through our ports.
For example, in Laredo, TX, alone, about 14,000 trucks pass each day through the ports of entry. It is one of the largest if not the largest land-based port in the United States. These goods need to move legally through our ports, and any disruption in legitimate international commerce can have a swift impact on these communities.
For the people of El Paso, for example, border security means much more than just safety. It means economic security as well. Just as it is important to keep the bad actors out, it is equally important to promote efficient transit through our ports for legitimate trade and commerce.
On Monday, I also had a chance to reconnect with my friend Mayor Dee Margo, the Mayor of El Paso. Among other things, we talked about the importance of ensuring that in our efforts to create a strong border, we are not neglecting our ports of entry.
In recent months, a number of El Paso Sector Customs officers have been sent to other high-need areas along the U.S.-Mexico border. The personnel shortage has resulted in increased wait times for both pedestrian traffic and commerce. Certainly, fewer CBP agents mean a reduced vigilance in terms of screening out contraband and other things that we don't want coming into the country. The goods moving through the ports in El Paso fuel not just the local economy, as I said, but also that of the entire State of Texas--and, I would argue, of the Nation. I share the mayor's concerns on the harmful impact these slowdowns at the ports of entry can have.
As we debate the importance of securing our borders to stop the illegal movement of people and goods, we shouldn't neglect the importance of facilitating legal movement through our ports. We need to do both, whether that means providing additional funding for infrastructure improvements or scanning technology to make sure the ports of entry aren't exploited by drugs in vehicles or other places where they are hard to find. In the absence of scanning technology, if we are unable to find them, the cartels win, and the American people lose. We also know that in addition to that technology, we need additional personnel.
I hope my colleagues listen to the feedback that we have all gotten from the experts and these local stakeholders and take seriously the economic impact on our ports of entry as well.
As I said yesterday, I look forward to reviewing the details of the funding agreement struck by the conference committee, and I hope that, in addition to physical barriers where appropriate, it reflects these principles of smart border security, because when we listen to the experts--the law enforcement officials who work along the border and in the communities--that is when we move in the right direction, spending money in a responsible and smart way rather than just pursuing political agendas from Washington. Nomination of William Barr
Mr. President, we are also going to be voting--perhaps today, maybe tomorrow--on the nomination of William Barr to serve as the next Attorney General of the United States. The role of Attorney General is unique in the President's Cabinet because while you are a political appointee of the President, you are also the Nation's chief law enforcement officer and, obviously, are obligated to put your highest loyalty in upholding the rule of law.
I asked Mr. Barr about this unique role during his confirmation hearing. He told me that over the years he has received a number of calls from people who were being considered for appointment to the position of Attorney General. He told them that if they wanted to pursue any political future, they would be crazy to accept the job of Attorney General. He said: ``If you take this job, you have to be ready to make decisions and spend all your political capital and have no future because you have to have that freedom of action.'' He assured me that he is in a position now in his life where he can do what he needs to do without fear of any consequences.
I was glad to hear that because I believe that is the most fundamental quality of an Attorney General. The Department of Justice must be able to operate above the political fray and prioritize the rule of law above all else, and to do that it needs a strong and principled leader like Bill Barr--particularly, on the heels of Loretta Lynch's and Eric Holder's administrations as Attorneys General of the United States during the Obama term of office, where we know that, unfortunately, politics pervaded the actions not only of the Department of Justice but also the FBI in things ranging from the Hillary Clinton email investigation to the counterintelligence investigation of some of the people associated with the Trump campaign.
Of course, this isn't the only reason he is the right person for the job. We know that he can faithfully execute the duties of the office because he has done it before.
More than two decades ago, President George Herbert Walker Bush recognized the talent in this promising young attorney and nominated him to three increasingly important positions in the Department of Justice. For all three positions, Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel, Deputy Attorney General, and, finally, Attorney General, he was unanimously confirmed by the Senate. I would hope that he would be unanimously confirmed as Attorney General once again, but I have my doubts.
After hearing Mr. Barr speak about his views of the role of Attorney General, I have no question as to why not a single Senator opposed his nomination during those three previous confirmation votes. He spoke of the importance of acting with professionalism and integrity, of ensuring that the character of the Department of Justice is maintained and can withstand even the most trying political times, and of serving with independence, providing no promises or assurances to anyone on anything other than faithfully administering the rule of law.
When Mr. Barr was nominated for Attorney General the first time, then-Judiciary Chairman Joe Biden noted that Mr. Barr, a nominee from the opposing political party, would be a ``fine Attorney General.'' I agree, and I thank Mr. Barr for agreeing to serve, once again, this country in this critical position. I look forward to voting yes on his nomination.
I would just add that I am saddened by the way the politics of the moment--the desire to defeat any legislation or oppose any nominee by this President--has led some of our colleagues across the aisle to oppose this nomination. I don't know whether it is out of fear of the most radical fringe of their political party or by their antipathy for this President, but it is regrettable.
I do believe, however, that Mr. Barr will be confirmed, as he should be, as the next Attorney General of the United States. I look forward to casting a ``yes'' vote on that nomination.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source