Setting Forth the Congressional Budget for the United States Government for Fiscal Year 2022 and Setting Forth the Appropriate Budgetary Levels for Fiscal Years 2023 Through 2031

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. 3284; Boozman, No. 3103; and Braun, No. 3114.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, at my request this amendment incorporates language reflecting Democratic priorities funded by the budget resolution, including smart and effective border security measures like nonintrusive inspection systems, hiring additional Customs officers for screening at lawful ports of entry, hiring additional immigration judges and asylum officers to reduce backlogs and enhance the efficiency and fairness of the asylum system.

I thank the Senator from Kansas for accepting these changes, and I support his amendment. Vote on Amendment No. 3795

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, this has been a historic day in the U.S. Senate. We started by passing a bipartisan infrastructure bill that made history, and now the Senator from Missouri is finally coming around to supporting the COPS Hiring Program that was created by Senator Joe Biden in 1994.

Since its creation, the COPS Program--listen to this--has helped over 13,000 local police departments hire over 134,000 officers. We believe in it on the Democratic side. We are glad you have come around.

We sent a letter to the Appropriations Committee, signed by 37 Democrats, for the COPS Program. Do you know how many Republicans signed the letter? None. But with your amendment tonight, clearly you have come around. The Republicans are joining the Democrats in supporting Joe Biden's COPS Program. You are right: We need 100,000 more police. And we stand with Joe Biden's program and are glad that you have joined us. Vote on Amendment No. 2734

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, imagine it is 3 in the morning, in a desert, on our border, and the Border Patrol is out there and finds a family--a mother and a father and two small children.

What do they do when they are 50 miles away from a port of entry?

They obviously take them to that port of entry, but according to the Marshall amendment, they can't do it.

Listen to his language: ``[p]rohibiting migrants who have not received a negative COVID-19 test from being transported.''

They can't be transported out of the desert because they don't have a negative COVID-19 test? And what if they show up at the detention center--and I have mentioned this to Dr. Marshall already--and there is a new person walking in who happens to be a mother who is in labor and needs to go to a hospital immediately?

According to your language, they cannot be transported unless they have a negative COVID-19 test.

I would say to you, Doctor, that is not good medicine; that is not humane. I asked you to change those provisions. I gave you language to do that. I am sorry you didn't. Vote on Amendment No. 3797

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, we all agree on one basic thing: No one who is dangerous to the United States should be allowed to come to this country. And those who are here and not citizens who are guilty of a serious crime should be removed from this country.

That is the highest law enforcement priority not only of those gathered here but also of the Biden administration.

The Hagerty amendment, though, makes it clear that he is seeking to increase funding for detention and deportation of more undocumented immigrants who have been convicted of any crime in the United States-- not a serious crime, not a violent crime, any crime--including nonviolent misdemeanors.

The ICE Agency has sufficient funds to carry out its law enforcement function, with a total budget of over $8 billion. This overly broad amendment does not distinguish between the crimes committed by individuals, the serious ones versus those that are not.

It would divert ICE from focusing its resources on the truly serious public safety and national security threats. I urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, the Senator from Mississippi has stated her case explicitly: If a prosecutor fails to prosecute a case, the town or community that he represents as prosecutor--the town or community--will be denied Federal funds. Think about this. Under the Senator's amendment, if a district attorney decides not to charge a certain property offense, even in just one case, the whole town will lose its eligibility for Federal funding under programs like the Violence Against Women Act--we know what that is; it is certainly a refuge for many people who are victims of domestic violence--or the Bulletproof Vest Grant Act to protect law enforcement in that same community. They would lose their opportunity for Federal grants under the Senator's amendment that she is offering.

I think we ought to think carefully about this. Prosecutors decide whether to proceed with a case or not proceed based on the amount of evidence, the likelihood of conviction, the possibility of securing a plea bargain for a lesser offense. To deny a community Federal funds--

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN.--or the police--I hope all of my colleagues would oppose this amendment. Vote on Amendment No. 3568

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, the Grassley amendment would exclude from a path to citizenship any undocumented immigrant who has been convicted of any crime or who has been merely charged with a crime. This is a broad exclusion, applies to any criminal conviction no matter how long ago it took place, how minor the crime, and to any criminal charge even if the individual is ultimately exonerated.

This exclusion is also unnecessary because every legalization bill pending in the Senate requires a criminal background check and excludes individuals convicted of a serious crime. For example, the bipartisan House-passed Dream and Promise Act would bar an immigrant from receiving legal status if they have been convicted of any felony, any drug offense, or any crime of domestic violence.

Also, we have to accept the obvious: Crossing the border illegally can be a crime, if one wants to be charged with that. This amendment is inconsistent with due process and does nothing to increase public safety.

I urge my colleagues to vote no. Vote on Amendment No. 3650

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source