Executive Session

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, I wish to spend a few moments this morning talking about realistic solutions to the ongoing crisis along American's southern border.

Obviously, I come from a border State where we have 1,200 miles of common border with the nation of Mexico--which, of course, has been the gateway now to this humanitarian wave of unaccompanied children coming from Central America into the United States. I will talk more about that in detail, but I first want to comment on something the majority leader said this morning in his opening remarks.

With what has now become his trademark hyperbole and frequent disregard for the facts, the majority leader suggested that the Republican platform was: Deport first, find solutions later--or never.

I find that offensive, and it is certainly not true. I can just assume that the majority leader has had other things that have taken his attention and he has ignored completely the concrete solutions I and others have been promoting, some of which I will talk about here in a moment.

The last thing I would say specifically to this offensive and untrue comment of the majority leader this morning is: If you are truly concerned about this issue, Senator Reid, you might want to focus on Members of your own party. After all, no less than Vice President Joe Biden has said of the unaccompanied minors flooding across from the U.S.-Mexican border:

It is necessary to put them back in the hands of a parent in the country from which they came.

He went on to say:

Once an individual's case is fully heard, and if he or she does not qualify for asylum, he or she will be removed from the United States and returned home.

That is Vice President Biden. Perhaps the majority leader should talk to him or he could talk to our former Senate colleague Hillary Clinton, former Secretary of State, who said this about these unaccompanied children:

[They] should be sent back as soon as it can be determined who the responsible adults in their families are.

That is former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and, in all likelihood, the Democratic Party's nominee for the President of the United States in 2016. Perhaps the majority leader should talk to her or he could talk to the Secretary of Homeland Security under whose purview this issue falls most directly, who said that:

Under current U.S. laws and policies, anyone who is apprehended crossing our border illegally is a priority for deportation, regardless of age.

Perhaps the majority leader should pick up the phone and talk to him.

So rather than make offensive, politically motivated allegations, perhaps the majority leader should get his facts straight, talk to leaders of his own political party, and then work with us on this side of the aisle to try to find some realistic solutions.

As the insurgency rages in Iraq and the border between Syria and Iraq has collapsed and attention here in Washington has turned to other parts of the globe, I can say, without a doubt, the attention of my constituents in Texas is still very much focused on what is happening on our southwestern border and this surge of unaccompanied minor children who are making a dangerous and treacherous journey from Central America through Mexico and ending up on our doorstep.

First of all, though, when the facts began to unfold the administration said that human smuggling operations are responsible for creating a misinformation campaign, and that is why we are seeing this surge of unaccompanied minors.

There may actually be an element of truth to that if we think about it, because if the human smuggling operations--the drug cartels, organizations such as the Zetas and the associated gangs that work with them--make money on each and every migrant who passes through these corridors of human trafficking and human smuggling, then they probably are making money--more money the more people who come. They probably make more money with children and women and other migrants whom they kidnap and hold for ransom. So there is some element of that.

But then we have been told by the administration that the surge is entirely the result of gang violence and poverty in Central America, and that it has nothing to do with President Obama's policies or his perceived commitment to our immigration laws, including the enforcement that only the executive branch can do.

A few days ago, however, Secretary of Homeland Security Johnson published what he called ``an open letter to the parents of children crossing our Southwest border,'' in which he implicitly acknowledged that the President's immigration policies or the perception that he was less than committed to enforcing those policies has indeed become a magnet for illegal border crossings.

Referring to the so-called deferred action program President Obama announced in June of 2012--remember the President said, ``I have a pen and I have a phone''? Basically saying: I am going to go it alone, I am not going to work with Congress anymore? That was a product of the mentality and approach by the President.

But referring to the so-called deferred action program that President Obama announced in June of 2012, Secretary Johnson felt compelled in this open letter to inform his readers that:

The U.S. Government's Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, also called ``DACA,'' does not apply to a child who crosses the U.S. border illegally today, tomorrow or yesterday.

It doesn't apply. Secretary Johnson reiterated this point in the very next paragraph when he said:

There is no path to deferred action or citizenship, or one being contemplated by Congress, for a child who crosses our border illegally today.

If the sole driver of the border crisis was in fact Central American violence and poverty, or smuggling organizations, then there is no reason to believe that Secretary Johnson needed to clarify the details of U.S. immigration policy. After all, if the migrant surge has nothing to do with U.S. policy, as the White House initially insisted, then clarifying what that policy is won't affect it at all. But it has become simply undeniable that President Obama's policies--including his unilateral deferred action program, as well as the

perception that he less than seriously committed to enforcing current law and in fact has ordered Secretary Johnson to investigate and recommend a further relaxation of his enforcement policies--all of this has played a huge role in creating the perception to tens of thousands of unaccompanied children that you should risk your life and travel unaccompanied in the hands of the cartels to the United States, because there won't be any consequences associated with it.

It is that perception that the President continues to create by his silence that is the magnet for this illegal immigration.

Don't take my word for it. According to an internal Department of Homeland Security memo:

The main reason the subjects chose this particular time to migrate to the United States was to take advantage of the ``new'' U.S. ``Law'' that grants a ``free pass'' or permit .....

In other words, they came because of a widespread perception that unaccompanied minors and women traveling with children would be allowed to stay, even after crossing the border illegally.

I think there is more to this story. In fact, what we have learned is that women traveling with children are frequently given a notice to appear once they are processed by the Border Patrol--a notice to appear for a hearing in a court that would then determine any claims of asylum or then determine whether they can stay in the United States or they would have to return to their country of origin. This is called a notice to appear.

Strangely enough, the vast majority of immigrants who get a notice to appear never show up. It makes one wonder about the ones who do show up, because there is absolutely no followthrough.

This is what is perceived, has been this ``permission'' or ``free pass'' or ``permiso'' in Spanish.

Meanwhile, a study by the Department of Homeland Security's Office of Science and Technology Directorate concluded that the unaccompanied minors:

..... are aware of the relative lack of consequences they will receive when apprehended at the U.S. border.

Relative lack of consequences. In other words, nothing happens to them. If you make it here, you will be able to stay. That is the perception.

Again, it is puzzling to me that even though the administration's own documents show a clear reason for the surge, they initially continue to offer the public a shifting narrative.

There is no doubt that drug- and gang-related violence in Central America is bad. It is a matter of tremendous concern for U.S. policymakers. It is terrible, it is heartbreaking, and it is something I propose we try to address. I had a great conversation, for example, on the floor a couple days ago with the senior Senator from California, Mrs. Feinstein, who said: Maybe there is something we can do, as we have done in the past, in countries such as Colombia, countries such as Mexico, and elsewhere, where we have worked with our partners there to try to help them restore security and the rule of law. That certainly is a conversation I look forward to continuing.

But the fact is the violence in Central America didn't just begin a couple years ago. As a matter of fact, the murder rates in Guatemala and El Salvador were higher in 2009 than they were in 2012 and 2013. But the massive spike in illegal immigration by unaccompanied minors didn't start until 2012--the very same year, not coincidentally, when the President announced his unilateral deferred action program, again creating the perception that if you came here, you would be able to stay. Thus, there is no wonder that people felt as though the floodgates had opened, creating the humanitarian crisis and overwhelming the capacity of local, State, and Federal authorities to deal with all of these children.

By fiscal year 2013, the number of unaccompanied minors detained on our southern border had grown to nearly 25,000--up from 6,500 2 years earlier. From 6,500 to 25,000 in 2 years' time.

According to the New York Times:

From October to June 15th, 52,000 unaccompanied minors were caught at the American border with Mexico, twice the number for the same period in the previous year.

There are estimates that could turn out to be 60,000 or more this year and could double next year. One begins to wonder: Where does this end? How does this end?

So between the President's refusal to enforce our immigration laws and his ever-shifting explanation as to the source of the ongoing crisis, it is no wonder that the President has lost so much credibility on this issue.

Indeed, if the President wants to know why he hasn't been able to pass immigration reform in the House and the Senate, all he has to do is look at the fact that people have lost confidence in his willingness to enforce the law.

I know the senior Senator from New York has suggested: Well, we should pass an immigration law and postpone its effective date until after President Obama leaves office. I would say that is a shocking statement, it seems to me, which has been reiterated by the majority leader Senator Reid.

There is an enormous amount of distrust about the Federal Government's commitment to enforce the law. So I don't care what the law might ultimately be; if the American people don't believe the President and the Attorney General and the executive branch will enforce the law, we have lost their confidence entirely, and we will never be able to improve and fix our broken immigration system, something I am committed to do.

Given all the different narratives coming out of the White House concerning the surge of unaccompanied minors, I think it would be good for the President to directly address the issue.

He has sent Vice President Biden to Central America. That is a positive step. I know Secretary Johnson has visited the Rio Grande Valley and some of these detention centers for unaccompanied minors. That is a positive step. And he has written this open letter to the parents of children in Central America discouraging them from sending their children on this long, perilous journey from Central America to the United States through these drug-smuggling and human-smuggling corridors controlled by the Zetas and other cartels.

Yesterday I submitted a resolution with my friend the junior Senator from Florida, Mr. Rubio, that calls on the President to do five things:

No. 1, it calls on the President to publicly declare that the deferred action

program he unilaterally announced in June 2012 will not apply to the recent waves of children who have been illegally crossing our southwestern border.

That is the same thing that Secretary Johnson and others have been saying, but it is different coming from the President of the United States. It will be covered by the press. It will be communicated to parents in Central America: Don't send your children to the United States, making them an additional part of this humanitarian crisis, and subject them to all the perils I have talked about repeatedly of that treacherous trip from Central America to the United States.
Secondly, this resolution calls on the President to publicly discourage parents in Central America and Mexico and elsewhere from sending their kids on one of the most dangerous migration journeys in the world.

Third, it calls on the President to fully and faithfully enforce U.S. immigration laws.

I don't know what the facts are, but I do know some of the Members of the House of Representatives--Luis Gutiérrez has very recently said that if we can't pass immigration reform that suits him, he wants the President to take further unilateral action declining to enforce our immigration laws. That just contributes to the impression that is causing this wave of humanity to come to the United States and creating the humanitarian crisis. It doesn't fix it. It makes it worse.

I hope the President is watching and listening and decides that he needs to be the one to make the statement, because only the President has the bully pulpit necessary to deal with this.

Fourth, our resolution calls on the President to ensure that States such as Texas--and I see my colleague from Arizona; I would include Arizona, California, and other border States--have the resources we need to handle the crisis and to guarantee humane treatment of unaccompanied migrant children.

Some of my colleagues from Texas visited the facility in Lackland Air Force Base on Monday, including Senator Cruz and others, and they reported back conditions which, frankly, are very disturbing.

Fifth, this resolution calls on the President to work closely with Mexico and Central American officials to improve security at Mexico's southern border. Mexico has a 500-mile southern border with Guatemala which is insecure and porous, through which all of the unaccompanied minors from Central America come.

I realize how controversial and polarizing the whole discussion about immigration can be, but I suggest we need to try to work together on a bipartisan basis to deal with it. Hopefully, by making this above partisan politics and doing our job, we can help resolve this immediate crisis, but then we can help regain the public's confidence so they will allow us to take the reasonable steps we know we need to take moving forward to fix our broken immigration laws.

I believe passing this resolution would send a powerful message about our commitment and the President's commitment to the rule of law, our commitment to resolving the current border crisis, and our commitment to saving these young children from unimaginably treacherous journeys through Mexico which I previously described.

I urge all of our colleagues to work together with us to send that message, and encourage the President to use the bully pulpit to send the message I have outlined.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CORNYN. I appreciate the question. I would say there is nobody in this Chamber who has been more involved in trying to fix our broken immigration laws than the senior Senator from Arizona. And certainly the senior Senator from Illinois has been very much involved. Both of them are members of the so-called Gang of 8 who were the primary authors of the Senate-passed immigration bill.

But I would point out that not even under that bill would these children be covered, because they wouldn't qualify for the so-called DREAM Act provisions authored by the senior Senator from Illinois.

That is the point the Secretary of Homeland Security has been trying to make--this is not a green light to anybody and everybody who wants to come to the United States.

For their protection, for the protection and safety of the American people, and in the interest of an orderly immigration flow and the rule of law, we need people to play by the rules, and it is the perception that there are no rules and that if you make it here, you will be able to stay regardless of whether you qualify under the law that created this flood of humanity.

The second thing I would say, the Senator is exactly right. I think people underestimate the horror inflicted on migrants who are transported from Central America through Mexico up into the United States at the hands of transnational criminal organizations. The ``coyotes'' as we always called them are the human smugglers. They now have to pay the cartels for protection or they cannot travel through the corridors up through Mexico and the United States. These migrants in the process of being transported here, riding on the train the Senator alluded to called The Beast, are prone to accidents. They could lose their life, leg or limb, be kidnapped, held for ransom. Women will be raped and assaulted. It is horrific.

Who in their right mind would subject their family to those sorts of horrors only to end up in the United States when our laws do not permit their entry into this country? Somehow the President or the Secretary of Homeland Security are the only ones who have the bully pulpit who can send that message in a way none of us can to convince them we are going to enforce our law.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CORNYN. I say to the senior Senator from Arizona and the senior Senator from Illinois--and I will turn the floor over to Senator Durbin in a moment--that there are two big problems: This wave of children is coming and not allowed to legally stay in the United States and thus subject to being returned to their country of origin. Both Vice President Biden and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that is the law of the land.

If the President doesn't step up and use his bully pulpit to send this message in a way that none of us can because people pay attention to him and not as much to us--I think that is a fair statement--then this wave is going to continue, and it is going to get worse and worse.

I ask through the Chair to the senior Senator from Arizona and the senior Senator from Illinois--both of whom I know care passionately and are committed to fixing our broken immigration laws, although we have had our differences--how will the American people let us do this if they have lost confidence in the executive branch's willingness to enforce the current law? I think it makes it much, much harder.

In fact, as I alluded to a moment ago, the majority leader and the senior Senator from New York said: Let's pass immigration reform but delay its implementation until after President Obama leaves office.

That sounds like an embarrassing proposal.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CORNYN. I will yield in a moment.

That has to be embarrassing. It shows a lack of confidence in the President's commitment to enforce the rule of law. I think it is a problem. I think the President can help mitigate that problem and help restore the impression that you are not going to get a free pass if you make it to our southern border.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CORNYN. I say to my friend from Illinois that I tried to make clear that the current law bars the entry of these children and people across the border because they would not even meet the terms of the President's Executive order, that is, if you believe the President's Executive order has the effect of law, which I don't.

There are a couple of issues. It is both the impression that the President is not committed to enforcing the law and the fact that now when these adults are detained and children are placed with relatives in the country, virtually none of them show up for their hearing. So the perception--because we don't have a comprehensive system to enforce our immigration laws even after people come to our country--and reality of how that works tells them that if they make it here, they will never have to leave.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CORNYN. I say to the Senator from Illinois, here is how it works--I don't think we disagree about the law or the origin of the law but how it works in application. These children are now being placed with family members who may not be documented. They may have entered the country in violation of the immigration law, but because it is perceived as a relatively safe place for them to temporarily reside pending further court proceedings, they place the children with a family member in the United States. Absent a family member, I presume they will be placed with a legal guardian or foster family or the like while the legal proceedings go forward.

Here is the practical problem: Once they make it here to the United States, if they never return to the court in response to their notice to appear, then they are lost forever to the immigration enforcement system and they become a part of the great American melting pot, never to be heard from or seen again unless they commit some other crime. That is how the press reports it in Central America and elsewhere. At least that is the report we hear from migrants themselves. They refer to it as a permiso, which is a notice to appear. At that point they think they are home free and never have to show up for their court hearing, and that it is as good as permission to enter the country. I believe that is what actually is happening.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, I would respond to my friend from Illinois and say I would have them enforce the law, which is as the Senator has just described. Once the Border Patrol processes the child or migrant, then they turn them over to Health and Human Services, where they can be placed in humanitarian and hopefully clean conditions so their interests can be looked after while their legal case proceeds.

The problem is not just the fact that there are no consequences once these children or others are released on a notice to appear, which is never enforced, it is also the perception that people--for example, this morning Congressman Luis Gutiérrez said that he was so frustrated by our inability to pass immigration reform, that the President needs to withhold any deportations or radically, essentially, refuse to enforce the law even further.

America is the most generous country in the world when it comes to our legal immigration system. We naturalize about 800,000 people a year. It has been up to as many as 1 million people. We are very generous. But it is not too much to insist that people do it through legal means for their protection and ours.

The statements the President has been making and the unilateral actions he continues to take give the perception he doesn't care what Congress says; he is going to go it alone. As a matter of fact, this morning the Supreme Court rebuked the President on an illegal recess appointment--unconstitutional recess appointment.

I think it is not just the law as it is written on the books, it is also how the law is actually implemented. It is also the further perception that the President is going to continue to basically refuse to repatriate people who enter the country illegally.

I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source