Department of Defense, Military Construction and Veterans Affairs, and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, at an appropriate time I will ask for some consideration of an amendment of mine, amendment No. 6. My amendment would hold the Obama administration accountable for its recent decision to release more than 2,000 undocumented immigrants from detention centers across the country in the past month. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement claimed they were releasing these people because they needed to reduce their average daily detention population of about 34,000 people--a congressionally mandated requirement. They claimed they had to reduce the detention population for budgetary reasons. Week after week, agents were tasked to release so many individuals.

At first the Department of Homeland Security claimed it only released a few hundred people. However, last week the Director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement admitted that the administration had misled the American people by confessing that over 2,200 aliens were actually released. They continue to stand by the excuse that budget cuts were the reason for releasing these individuals.

Simply blaming budget reduction as a means to turn a blind eye toward the national security of the American people is a very dangerous plan and one that calls into question the Department's preparation for sequestration, particularly when we consider that months before sequestration the Office of Management and Budget put out an order to all departments that national security, law enforcement, and safety and health should be a top priority. So if keeping criminals off the streets of the United States shouldn't be a top priority--as per the order from the Office of Management and Budget--I don't know what should be. So I want an accounting for it, and that is what my amendment does--requests a simple accounting for why they were released and what it was all about. What is even more disturbing is the fact that the Department had billions of unobligated funds from the past 2 years that could have been put into protecting the American people.

On February 27 I sent a request to Secretary Napolitano questioning the decisions of the Department. The letter, cosigned by Chairman Goodlatte of the House Judiciary Committee, was an attempt to better understand--just a simple understanding--how the Department will better confront sequestration and reduce operational challenges that could affect the life, safety, and health of the American people--the same life, health, and safety of the American people evidenced by this very administration's directive going out from the Office of Management and Budget of the priorities that ought to be established during sequestration.

Now, you know what. So often what we find from this administration--and have even found in previous Republican administrations--is that letters that are embarrassing go unanswered. Unfortunately, this is not unusual. About a dozen of my letters to the Secretary of Homeland Security on just the immigration issue have gone unanswered. There is no respect for congressional oversight. It is very frustrating.

We are on the cusp of undertaking a massive reform of our immigration system. Yet getting answers to the most basic questions seems to be an impossible operation. Time and again, we have seen this administration refuse to be held accountable, and what we want is just information. It is not as though we are saying that what the administration has done--even if we disagree with it--can't be done or shouldn't be done. But shouldn't the people know about who is being turned out in the streets when they have been held in confinement for a long period of time? I fear what will become of the President's promise of transparency if and when we do pass an immigration bill. And this is an example of things to fear in the future. Enacting a bill is one part of the process, and implementing the law is another part of the process. If we don't have faith in this administration now, what about trust for the future?

So my amendment would require U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to submit weekly reports--just submit reports--to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations and the Judiciary. The reports will be required to contain detailed budgets on how ICE will maintain the 34,000 detention bed occupancy levels authorized by Congress. It also requires ICE to provide the number of aliens released from detention as well as the following information on aliens released for budget-related purposes: the conviction or charge for which they were detained, fugitive status, existence of a prior deportation order, and the terms of release.

My amendment happens to be cosponsored by Senators Inhofe, Vitter, Boozman, Roberts, Coats, McConnell, and Collins.

Within the last few days, we have had the Director of ICE, Mr. Morton, testify--well, it was just yesterday in the House. Chairman Goodlatte said his testimony raised more questions.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a press release that expresses the testimony of Director Morton.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. GRASSLEY. Last week Mr. Morton said they released 10 level 1 offenders. These are people convicted of violent crimes. They are repeat drunk drivers, as an example. Yesterday he said they only released eight, but he also said they were trying to relocate them and bring them back in. Well, if you have these dangerous people out on the streets, the public ought to know about it.

So I suspect that when I ask unanimous consent now, the other side will object to my amendment. And I don't know why they want to go to such lengths to protect this administration when all we want is simple information--just simple information. We aren't saying that the decisions made--even though we disagree with them--ought to be changed. We are just saying that the public ought to know when we put violent people out on the streets, and when we put people out on the streets who shouldn't be out on the streets, we ought to know where they are, why they were put out there, and what it is all about.

I think the objection to allowing this amendment to have a vote--as I presume it will be objected to--is indefensible, but at this point I call up for consideration my amendment No. 76, and I ask for just 10 minutes of debate and a vote on my amendment. I ask unanimous consent to do that.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source