Department of Homeland Security Funding

Floor Speech

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, the subject of our debate today is that it is wholly inappropriate that at this moment in time some in Congress are deciding that they are going to hold hostage Homeland Security funding unless they get 100 percent of what they want.

I think immigration reform is a terribly important issue. I was proud to join in one of the broadest, bipartisan votes in the past few years to pass bipartisan immigration reform. I was disappointed when our friends in the House didn't take up that legislation and pass it.

Subsequent to that failure to act on the part of the House, the President has acted--and I believe there are even folks here watching these proceedings now who are beneficiaries of those Executive actions, some of the DREAMers.

Now if this body wants to redebate immigration, that is a fair topic, a fair subject.

And I, for one, would welcome that full-throated debate again. But it should not--it should not--be tied to a critical part of national homeland security funding.

The remarkable thing is this is actually an area where both parties came to agreement on the size of the budget and the program prioritization. There was an agreement. But instead, extraneous items were added that now some are saying if we don't get these items we are willing to roll the dice or potentially shut down the most essential parts of our government at a time of enormous international and potentially domestic challenge.

All of us, obviously, can come and speak about the unspeakable tragedies we saw reported coming out of the Middle East. We see as well challenges that ISIL presents potentially--not just in that region but to the homeland and in terms of trying to encourage homegrown terrorists. The notion there would be Members of this body or any body who would say it is okay to cut off funding to DHS at this moment in time is remarkable.

The American people--as someone who just went through a refreshing reminder of what they are looking for through my last election process--do not want us to legislate in this way. They want us to get things done. They want us to actually find common ground. And on homeland security we have made the hard choices on where the dollars ought to come from and where they ought to be prioritized.

But if the loudest voices get their way and hold this funding hostage, not only would it make our country more vulnerable to terrorist threats but a DHS shutdown would jeopardize our national security by disrupting other important programs, such as grants to train local law enforcement and to protect our communities. And as many as 240,000 people responsible for frontline security--more than 80 percent of DHS employees--will still have to show up to work--they just won't get paid for it. Many of them in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

This is a threat to the homeland, it is a threat to our law enforcement, it is a threat in terms of our ability to respond to crises with FEMA, and there is threat even without those potential tragedies of the normal course of an American citizen as they pass through airports and other venues. Ultimately, for an agency that has been under some strain, these 240,000 people who are working hard to protect our homeland have to provide for their families.

This is not the way this body should operate. I want to commend the majority for trying to say we will bring back an open process. But the notion that we will have a repeat of what we saw when we self-inflicted damage upon this whole economy when we shut down the government a few years ago because of an unwillingness of a few to compromise--if that is repeated now around homeland security, it would be a dreadful mistake.

Source