Securing America's Borders Act

SECURING AMERICA'S BORDERS ACT

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, first, I commend Senators McCain and Kennedy, who are on the Senate floor. They have really pointed the way for a positive resolution of a problem we have faced for generations in America.

The immigration system in our country is seriously broken, and we know it. It is obvious, as we look at the number of undocumented people in America and as we consider, those of us in this line of work, all of the families who come to us with problems with the current system. There is so much unfairness, so much injustice. We can do better as a nation, a nation of immigrants.

Now the Senate will face a very clear and stark choice. Senator Frist brings to the floor an alternative. His is an alternative that focuses on enforcement.

Well, Senator Frist is not alone in believing we need to be better at enforcing the laws of our country. In fact, Senator Frist's bill and the bill I support--the one that came from the Senate Judiciary Committee, supported by Senator Specter, the chairman of the committee, inspired by Senators McCain and Kennedy in major part--is a bill which also focuses on enforcement.

Both bills double the size of the Border Patrol by adding 12,000 new agents. Both bills strengthen interior enforcement of immigration laws by adding 5,000 new immigration investigators. Both bills would take advantage of new technology to create a ``virtual fence'' at the border. Both bills would improve border controls by expanding entry-exit tracking. Both bills require the construction of new vehicle barriers and new permanent highway checkpoints near the border. The list goes on and on. The bills are the same when it comes to enforcement at our broken borders, as it should be.

But what the Frist bill does beyond that is what is clearly unacceptable, from my point of view, and was unacceptable in the Senate Judiciary Committee. The Frist bill continues the provision that was started in the House of Representatives which criminalizes those who are here in undocumented status and those who help them. That is where this bill, the Frist bill, crosses the line. That is why it is unacceptable. This concept was rejected in the Senate Judiciary Committee and should be rejected on the floor of the U.S. Senate.

Think about it for a moment. Are we serious that we are going to charge 12 million people with the crime that Senator Frist would create in his provision? Are we saying to people who are here in the United States under a myriad of different circumstances that they are going to be treated as criminals amongst us?

To what end? To arrest them, to apprehend them, to prosecute them, to incarcerate them? Of course, we can't do that. With 12 million people, it can't be done.

But by branding them as criminals at the outset, it is a guarantee they will never come out of the shadows. They will stay lurking as part of our culture, part of our economy in illegal status indefinitely. Criminalizing them is not the answer.

Sadly, the bill goes even further. In the instance of undocumented people amongst us, it would subject them to a misdemeanor subject to 6 months in jail, but it goes much further for the Good Samaritans who assist them. That is the most outrageous element of the Frist bill. It is harsh. It is not American.

Consider this for a moment. If a priest counsels a mother that she should remain in the United States with her children who happen to have been born here and are American citizens, that priest can be found guilty of an aggravated felony for having counseled her to stay in the United States. In the city of Chicago, which I am proud to represent, we have a domestic violence shelter, Mujeres Latinas en Accion. It is in a section known as Little Village. It is primarily a Mexican section of our city. Some are citizens; some are not. This domestic violence shelter brings in battered mothers and their children to protect them from their abusive, drunken husbands while they call the police department. The social workers who are standing at the door protecting those mothers and children would be subject to being charged with a felony under the Frist provisions. A nurse who offers to a mother at a medical clinic the advice that she should bring her child back, without checking to make certain she is not undocumented, could be charged with a felony. Is that where we are headed? Is that the kind of America we want to live in? I don't think so.

The Senate Judiciary Committee rejected that. Why Senator Frist continues to offer it, I don't know. I don't think it is consistent with the goal we all share. The goal we share is in repairing the system, better enforcement at the borders, better enforcement when it comes to employment so we will know if employers are exploiting the undocumented. That is part of real enforcement that will lead to fairness and justice in the way we deal with immigration.

There's another problem with the majority leader's bill. It would do nothing to address the situation of 12 million undocumented immigrants who currently live in our country. We need tougher enforcement, but in the Judiciary Committee bill we acknowledge something that the majority leader's bill does not: A strategy that focuses on enforcement only is doomed to failure.

Beyond that, the McCain-Kennedy bill, which is an inspired piece of legislation, would offer a chance for immigrants who work hard and play by the rules to earn their way to citizenship over the course of many years. This is not an amnesty. Amnesty says we forgive you. The McCain-Kennedy bill does not say that. The McCain-Kennedy bill says: If you are here undocumented for a variety of reasons, if you are here without legal status, there is a path you can follow. It is a long path, a demanding path, but at the end, you could end up in a legal position or have a chance. That is the best approach for us to use.

Let me tell you exactly what the McCain-Kennedy provisions would require in this path to legalization. It is not a free ride. It is not a get-out-of-jail-free card. Let me tell you what you would have to do during the course of an 11-year commitment on your part to finally reach citizenship: a clean criminal record, employment since before January 2004, remaining continuously employed during this period, paying approximately $2,000 in fines and fees, passing a security background check, passing a medical examination, learning English, learning U.S. history and government, and paying all back taxes. If you have complied with all of those requirements, you will go to the back of the line behind all applicants currently waiting for green cards. That is not an amnesty; that is a demanding process which will test the undocumented as to whether they really want to be part of America on a legal and permanent basis.

All of us understand--those of us who are the sons and daughters of immigrants--that the people who come to these shores bring a special quality. David Brooks of the New York Times has an article which I ask unanimous consent to print in the RECORD.

There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Brooks' message was addressed primarily to Republicans and conservatives, but he spells out for all who read it what these immigrant people bring to America. My mother came to these shores in 1911 at the age of 2. Her mother, my grandmother, brought her from Lithuania with her brother and sister. They made to it East St. Louis, IL, where my grandfather worked in a steel mill. My mom dropped out of school after the eighth grade, which was not unusual in her time, got married, and a few years later became a naturalized citizen. Her son is now the 47th Senator from the State of Illinois. Those stories can be told over and over.

Think of the courage of the people who came here, starting with my family and others, the courage to leave behind your village, your church, your language, your relatives, your friends, to come to a country you have never seen before with a language you didn't speak to try to make a better life. So many of us are so blessed to be here from the start, but others fight night and day for the chance to come. They don't just bring another body to be counted; they bring a spirit. It is a spirit of hard work and determination, creativity, entrepreneurship. It is a spirit of family values that we should treasure. Mr. Brooks says as much in his article.

This is a positive force in the development of America, and it always has been. We should look at this as a positive opportunity for America to be a stronger nation, a nation that grows in the right direction with the right people and the right values.

The Frist bill is the wrong approach. Criminalizing those who are here, charging those who help them with felonies for simply providing humanitarian assistance is wrong. It is far better for us to take the more constructive and comprehensive approach of the Specter bill that was reported by the Senate Judiciary Committee.

I reserve the remainder of my time.

http://thomas.loc.gov/