Bring Jobs Home Act--Motion to Proceed

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, 11 years ago I introduced the DREAM Act to allow a select group of immigrant students with great potential to contribute more fully to America. The DREAM Act said that in order to qualify, they had to earn their way to a legal status and they had to have come to the United States as children, be long-term U.S. residents, have good moral character, graduate from high school, and agree to serve in our military or at least complete 2 years of college.

These young people literally came to the United States as infants and children. They grew up in this country. They went to school with our kids. They are the valedictorians, the athletes, and even the ROTC leaders in schools across America. They did not make the decision to come here; they were just kids. Their parents made the decision. As Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said, immigrants who were brought here illegally as children ``lacked the intent to violate the law.'' It is not the American way anyway to punish children for the wrongdoing of their parents.

I am going to continue to work on this DREAM Act. It has been 11 years. I will work on it as long as I have to to get it done; it is that important. But the young people who are eligible, who would be eligible for it, cannot wait any longer. Many have already been deported to countries they never remembered and with languages they do not speak. There are still some at the risk of deportation.

That is why the Obama administration decision a few weeks ago to stop the deportation of young people who would be eligible for the DREAM Act was the right thing to do. The administration says we will allow these immigrant students to apply for a form of relief known as deferred action that puts their deportations on hold and allows them, on a temporary renewable basis to live and work legally in America. I strongly, strongly support this decision. I think it was a humane decision by the President of the United States on behalf of these young people.

When the history of the civil rights era we have lived through since the 1960s is written, this will be an important chapter. The administration's deportation policy has strong bipartisan support. It was 2 years ago that Republican Senator Richard Lugar of Indiana joined me in a letter to the President asking me to do this. Last year, Senator Lugar joined me, along with 22 other Senators, to sign a letter to the President asking the same thing, and what do the American people think about President Obama's decision on the DREAM Act students? It turns out that 64 percent of likely voters--including 66 percent of Independents--support the policy, compared to 30 percent who oppose it.

Earlier, my colleague and friend from Iowa Senator Grassley gave a speech on the Senate floor about this decision by the President. At one point in time, Senator Grassley was a cosponsor of the DREAM Act. We wouldn't know it from his speech today. He has changed his position on this bill just like so many other Republicans. Let me take a few minutes to respond to his specific points.

He claimed the President's policy to not deport the DREAM Act students is going to hurt the American economy. I couldn't disagree more. Granting deferred action of DREAM Act students will make us a stronger country giving these talented immigrants a chance to be part of America and its future.

Studies have found DREAM Act students can contribute literally trillions of dollars to the U.S. economy given a chance to be a part of it. We are not talking about importing new foreign workers into the United States to compete with Americans, we are talking about taking young people who are educated in our schools at our expense, trained and ready to give something to America and giving them a chance. They are going to be tomorrow's doctors, engineers, teachers, and nurses. We shouldn't squander their talents and all the years we invested in educating them by deporting them at this important point in their lives.

Senator Grassley said President Obama ``circumvented Congress to significantly change the law all by himself.'' With all due respect, I don't think that is how it happened. The Obama administration's new deportation policy is lawful and appropriate. Throughout history, all governments--and our Federal Government--have had to decide whom to prosecute and not to prosecute. It is called prosecutorial discretion. It is based on law enforcement priorities and resources. Every administration, Democratic and Republican, has stopped deportations of low-priority cases, as they should.

Just last month, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that the Federal Government has broad authority to decide whom to deport. Justice Anthony Kennedy, appointed by George H.W. Bush, wrote the opinion for the Court. This is what he said:

A principal feature of the removal system is the broad discretion exercised by immigration officials ..... Discretion in the enforcement of immigration law embraces immediate human concerns. Unauthorized workers trying to support their families, for example, likely pose less danger than alien smugglers or aliens who commit a serious crime.

The administration's policy is not just legal, it is realistic and smart. Today there are millions of undocumented immigrants in the United States. It is physically and literally impossible to deport them. So the Department of Homeland Security has to decide priorities. Shouldn't the highest priority be to deport those who are most dangerous to the United States? I think even the Senator from Iowa would have to concede that point. The Obama administration has made that its priority.

Senator Grassley calls the administration's deportation policy an amnesty. That is not right. The DREAM Act students will not receive permanent legal status or citizenship under the President's policy. They have temporary renewable legal status. It is temporary renewable legal status.

During his speech, Senator Grassley read a quote from an interview the President gave last year to support his claim that the President had changed his position on the DREAM Act, but he only read part of the quote. Here is what Senator Grassley read:

This notion that somehow I can just change the law unilaterally is just not true ..... the fact of the matter is there are laws on the books that I have to enforce. And I think there's been a great disservice done to the cause of getting the DREAM Act passed and getting comprehensive immigration passed by perpetuating the notion that somehow, by myself, I can go and do these things. It's just not true.

That is what Senator Grassley read. Here is the rest of the quote.

What we can do is prioritize enforcement--since there are limited enforcement resources--and say, we're not going to go chasing after this young man or anybody else who has been acting responsibly, and would otherwise qualify for legal status if the DREAM Act passed.

That is what the President said. I wish Senator Grassley had read that in the Record. The President has done what he has the authority to do as our Chief Executive Officer to exercise prosecutorial discretion.

I personally discussed this with Secretary Napolitano. She has assured me that the Department of Homeland Security is going to follow the President's lead but is going to have strict enforcement of fraud. If any young person commits fraud in this process, there will be a price to be paid. Senator Grassley should know that, and he shouldn't question it absent evidence to the contrary.

I might say it is sad we have reached this point that so few Republicans would stand for these young people. There was a time when Senator Hatch was the lead sponsor in this bill, and I was begging him to cosponsor it. Then it reached a point where he only voted for it, and then it reached a point where he voted against it.

Senator Grassley has voted for this bill in the past too. In 2006, when the Republicans lost control of Congress, the DREAM Act passed the Senate out of an amendment to the comprehensive immigration bill 62 to 36. There were 23 Republicans who voted for it. Unfortunately, the Republican leaders in the House refused to take up that bill in 2006. Republican support for the DREAM Act has diminished over the years. I have to say I noted the lack of volume and firepower in criticizing the President on this DREAM Act decision. I think many of our Republican colleagues realized the American people do support this two to one, and it is the right thing to do.

I am going to do what I have done on 48 other occasions and try to make this DREAM Act discussion more than an abstract conversation. I wish to make sure people understand who is involved in these decision processes.

This is a photograph of Maria Gomez. Her parents brought her from Mexico to Los Angeles when she was 8 years old. She started school in the third grade with English as a second language. By the time she was in sixth grade, 3 years later, she was an honor student.

In middle school, Maria discovered art and architecture. She began her dream of becoming an architect. In high school, Maria was active in community service and extracurricular activities, captain of the school spirit squad, president of the garden club, and a member of the California Scholarship Federation. She graduated 10th in her class with a 3.9-grade point average.

Maria was accepted by every college she applied to. Her dream was to attend UC Berkeley, the only State college in California that offers architecture to undergraduate students, but she couldn't afford it. Maria, and the other DREAM Act students, are not eligible for any Federal assistance to go to school. Instead, she decided to live at home and to attend UCLA. She was a commuter student. She rode the bus to and from UCLA, 2 1/2 hours each way each day.

While she was a full-time student, she worked to clean houses and did babysitting to help pay for tuition. She graduated from UCLA with a major in sociology and a minor in public policy. She was the first member of her family to graduate from college. She was determined to achieve her dream of becoming an architect. She enrolled in the Master of Architecture Program at UCLA. She was the only Latino student in the program. She struggled financially. At the time, she had to eat at the UCLA food bank. Because she couldn't afford housing near the campus, she spent many nights in a sleeping bag on the floor of the school's printing room.

Last year, Maria received her master's degree in architecture and urban design. She said:

I grew up believing in the American dream and I worked hard to earn my place in the country that nurtured and educated me. ..... Like the thousands of other undocumented students and graduates across America, I am looking for one thing, and one thing only: the opportunity to give back to my community, my state, and the country that is my home, the United States.

I ask my colleagues who are critical of the DREAM Act and President Obama's new policy: Would you prefer that we deport Maria Gomez back to Mexico at this point in her life, a country that she has not lived in since she was a small child? She grew up here. She has overcome amazing odds to become successful. This determined young woman can make America a better nation.

Thanks to President Obama's new policy, Maria is going to be able to work. I hope she will be able to get a license as an architect in her State. A future President could change this policy so Maria's future is still in doubt because we haven't enacted the DREAM Act. Maria is not the only one. There are tens of thousands similar to her.

The DREAM Act would give Maria, and others similar to her, the opportunity to be our future architects, engineers, teachers, doctors, and soldiers.

Today, I again ask my colleagues to support the DREAM Act. The President's new deportation policy is a step in the right direction, but ultimately it is our responsibility. He has done his part. We need to pass this humane and thoughtful bill and give people such as Maria Gomez a chance to make America a better place to live.

Source