Floor Statements

Mr. President, I rise to speak out against the nomination of Randal Quarles to be a member of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

Mr. Quarles served in the Bush administration's Treasury Department in the years that led up to the financial crisis of 2008. His failure to take action to prevent this crisis led to hundreds of thousands of foreclosures and evictions in my home State of Nevada. Nevada was ground zero for the financial crisis. We were the hardest hit of any State in the country. We had the highest foreclosure rate for 62 months straight, and we had the highest number of underwater mortgages. Banks took the homes of more than 219,000 Nevada families. Anyone driving through parts of Las Vegas and Reno in 2009 could see boarded-up houses, ``for sale'' signs, and empty lots everywhere. On many streets, you would see more houses in foreclosure than not.

I was attorney general in Nevada at this time. My team and I did everything we could to fight for homeowners and help them save their homes. We sued the big banks and secured $1.9 billion to create the Home Again: Nevada Homeowner Relief Program to help Nevadans stay in their homes.

As all of this was going on, I knew there was only so much we could do at the State level. We needed real change at the Federal level to prevent the financial crisis from ever happening again. The Federal regulators should have protected Nevada homeowners, but instead they protected the big banks. I ran for a seat in the Senate because I wanted to change the system. I wanted to put rules in place that protected Nevadans, not Wall Street bankers. That is why I cannot, in good conscience, support Randal Quarles' nomination to a 14-year term as a member of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve.

Randal Quarles was one of those policymakers in the Bush administration who let the big banks write their own rules. Maybe things would be different if he had learned the lessons of the financial crisis, if he had demonstrated any understanding that radical financial deregulation only helps the big banks, but Randal Quarles has been sitting on the Fed's Board of Governors since October of last year. Since then, he has advocated for policies that weaken oversight of the financial system, let big banks gamble with depositors' money, and undermine protections for consumers and homeowners.

Over a decade has passed since the rules he helped write caused hundreds of thousands of Nevadans to lose their homes, and he still hasn't learned his lesson. He is pushing the same agenda that led to the financial crisis in 2008. The mistakes he made as a member of the Bush administration devastated families and communities in my home State.

Now the Senate is about to reward him with a position--the Vice Chair of Supervision--that he will hold for the next 14 years. He will be the lead on writing the rules that govern Wall Street and the banks. I don't trust him to put families first. I don't believe he will make our financial systems safer and more fair. Randal Quarles shouldn't be allowed to oversee our financial system for 14 minutes. I refuse to rubberstamp his nomination for a position that lasts 14 years.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, I want to share with my colleagues and the American people what I witnessed on a visit to a couple of immigration detention facilities on our southern border and the stories of the people, children, and infants being held there.

On a visit to an adult detention facility, I sat down with a group of six mothers whose children had been taken from them. One of them, Anna, had a 5-year-old daughter she brought with her to the United States. After witnessing a brutal murder in her neighborhood and receiving death threats in her home country, she decided to leave that country to keep her 5-year-old daughter safe.

She traveled 3,000 miles to get to our southern border, and when she finally arrived, she thought: I am safe. I made it. I am going to tell them who I am and why I am here because I know I finally made it to safety.

She flagged down Customs and Border Patrol agents thinking that they would help her, but when she did, CBP officials arrested her. They took her into custody, and then they separated her from her daughter. Anna's daughter was put on a bus and driven hundreds of miles away.

As Anna was telling this story to me, every single one of the mothers began to cry. Anna told me this was the first time she had ever been separated from her 5-year-old daughter, and she had no idea--no idea-- where her daughter was and what they were doing with her. All of the women, as Anna was telling me the story, had experienced the same thing.

Each one of the women I spoke with had children under the age of 12 who were taken away from them. Their stories were the same. They had all faced horrific gang violence and abuse in their home country and fled to protect their families. They had been raped and tortured. They saw loved ones killed before their very eyes.

Another one of the women I spoke with, Griselda, explained that in her community, the gangs expect extortion payments every week from business owners, such as herself, and if you can't pay, they come to your house and kidnap or rape or kill your children.

One day, gang members came and started threatening her son. She knew in that moment she had two options: stay and watch her son die or pack up her children and run.

I asked the group of women: Why didn't you go to the police for help? They explained to me that the police in their country are just as corrupt as the gangs. In their country, there is no rule of law. There are no protections. If you want to save your children's lives, your only option is to run, and that is what these women did.

They came to the United States expecting to find freedom and protection, but instead they were thrown in jail, and their children were loaded on buses and driven away. These parents want to now know, where are their children?

When they asked me, I told them I didn't have the information they needed, and that I, too, was asking the same questions, but I promised them I would take their stories back with me to Washington, DC, and share them with the American people.

Because of President Trump's inhumane family separation policy, we have almost 3,000 children separated from their parents. Their moms and dads just want to have their children back in their arms.

Just recently, Secretary Azar testified that there is no reason why any parent would not know where their child is located. Well, that is absolutely false. I spoke with 10 mothers and fathers who have no clue where their children are. They look at me with tears running down their faces. They pleaded with me to help them find their children.

This administration gave no thought to the damage inflicted on these families, and they clearly had no plan for how they would reunite them.

We have three different entities working to reunify these families. Two are under the umbrella of the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and one under the Department of Health and Human Services, the Office of Refugee Resettlement, but none of them are working together. As a result, the Trump administration has missed its court-ordered deadline to reunite young children under 5 with their parents.

There are 102 children under 5 years old waiting to be reunited with their families, but as far as we know, only 4 families have been united.

The Trump administration has been ordered to reunite up to 3,000 children with their parents by July 26, but they are on track to miss that deadline too.

In the midst of all of this, HHS officials discovered they have been holding a toddler, who may be a U.S. citizen, in detention for over a year. How could that be possible? How could the reunification process be so erratic, inefficient, and slow?

This administration has been making excuses left and right, trying to pin the blame on anyone but themselves. They have suggested that the reunification process is slow because too many Members of Congress are taking tours of these detention facilities. I couldn't help but laugh when I heard that because I can guarantee you, I was not taking a tour when I tried to enter a children's detention facility, and they locked me out. They would not let me in. I was not allowed in to check on the condition of these children or even to talk to anyone in charge about how they were taking care of children, toddlers, and infants--kids under the age of 12 who have been separated from their parents, many for the first time.

I was there to find out how taxpayer money was being spent and how the kids were being treated, but the facilities manager locked the door and gave me the number for a communications director to call to seek assistance. With a handful of exceptions, most of my colleagues have also been turned away.

The Trump administration is also saying they are having trouble locating some of the parents. Part of the problem is, at least 12 of the parents with children under 5 years old have already been deported. Can you imagine that? Babies who can't even speak have no clue where their moms and dads went, and they might never know.

The Trump administration can't pin the blame for this on Congress, Democrats, or anyone else. They are missing the deadline for one reason and one reason only: because they never made a plan to reunite these families. They never intended to.

They didn't have a plan 2 weeks ago, when I went down to the border, and they don't have one now. They created this chaos with no plan to put the broken pieces back together.

They had to start from scratch trying to locate parents and children detained across the country, and now we are hearing heartbreaking stories of reunification--toddlers who do not recognize their mothers anymore. The physiological trauma this administration has inflicted on these children will last a lifetime.

So, today, I am calling on President Trump to finally do his job and provide us with a concrete plan. I want to see results, and I will not stop fighting until every child has been reunited with their parents. Stop making excuses. Stop blaming Democrats for the crisis you created, President Trump.

The other thing I keep hearing from this administration and from President Trump's allies is, the Democrats want open borders. This is not about open borders. I support strong, secure borders. I have spent my career fighting to uphold the law as the attorney general of the State of Nevada for 8 years, fighting to secure our borders. It is not about secure borders. We need a plan to reunite these families because this is about our values. This is about human rights. This is about who we are as a country, and separating families is not who we are. We do not tear babies out of their mothers' arms.

We have always--always--had a guiding principle when it comes to children: We do no harm. Whether they are Honduran children, Guatemalan children, Salvadoran children, or American children, we do no harm.

I call on President Trump, abandon your inhumane, zero tolerance immigration policy; abandon the heartless decision to separate families.

We should be looking for humane, cost-effective alternatives to detention for families fleeing violence. We don't need the Department of Defense to build internment camps for babies, toddlers, and kids.

Locking up families who are seeking asylum under the laws we have put in place to protect them will be a moral stain on our country for generations to come.

President Trump, the American people demand that you explain how you plan to reunite these families you have scarred forever and whom you ripped apart. Work with Democrats to solve the refugee crisis in Central America. Don't treat innocent parents and children as political pawns. Don't turn your back on everything this country stands for.

Thank you.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, after 19 years of dedicated service to the court, U.S. Magistrate Judge Valerie P. Cooke will be retiring on July 31, 2018. I wish to recognize Judge Cooke for her excellent service to the Federal judiciary and the State of Nevada while serving as U.S. Magistrate Judge for the District of Nevada since 1999.

As a third generation Nevada attorney, Judge Cooke has worked diligently to advance communities across Nevada, notably working to ensure equal protection under the law for the most vulnerable and forgotten populations. Judge Cooke initiated the CLEAR--Court Led Efforts at Recovery--court program, Nevada's first Federal reentry court, which helps to alleviate the barriers that formerly incarcerated individuals face as they attempt to reintegrate into society. She also worked to ensure inmates received timely resolutions to their civil rights claims by developing the District of Nevada's inmate early mediation program and implementing electronic filing for civil rights litigation.

Judge Cooke has also held leadership positions in a number of prestigious organizations and committees. Judge Cooke served as the 2008-2009 president of the Bruce R. Thompson Chapter of the American Inns of Court and continues to be active as an emeritus master. Judge Cooke was also the president of the Northern Nevada Women Lawyers Association in 1990 and was the 2001 recipient of the Outstanding Woman Lawyer of the Year Award.

Prior to her tenure on the bench, Judge Cooke served on the Nevada Tax Commission and the Nevada Judicial Discipline Commission. She has also devoted significant time to the advancement of alternative dispute resolution, serving on the Ninth Circuit's alternative dispute resolution committee from 2001 until 2013 and chairing the committee from 2009 to 2013. She has also conducted educational programs on the subject across the country and abroad.

In addition to her work in public service, Judge Cooke has consistently given back to her community. She has served as a mentor and as a role model for youth in Nevada through her involvement with Big Brothers Big Sisters, which led to her being named the 2009 School- Based Big Sister of the Year by Big Brothers Big Sisters of Northern Nevada. Judge Cooke conducts annual presentations to elementary through high school students on the work of a Federal judge and volunteers her time each year to serve as a high school mock trial judge. Judge Cooke embodies the Nevada values of leadership, service, and hard work. I ask my colleagues to join me in commending Valerie P. Cooke for her many years of service to the District of Nevada, the Federal bench, and communities across Nevada and the Nation.

Mr. President, today I am honored to recognize one of Nevada's most dedicated and exceptional educators, Mr. Scott Ginger of Green Valley High School, who has served thousands of students with the utmost dedication. Mr. Ginger, as his current and former students continue to call him, has remained committed to his students' success for 29 years. He began his career at William E. Orr Middle School in 1989 and moved to Green Valley High School 2 years later, where administrators, faculty, students, and families have revered him. He has won the Green Valley High School Golden Gator Award 17 times and has been inducted into the Clark County Teachers' Hall of Fame.

Nevadans who know Mr. Ginger are eager to highlight his impressive skills as a speech and debate coach, a role that has given him and his forensics team at Green Valley High School the county championship 24 consecutive times since 1995 and the State championship a record 16 times. In 2018, the National Speech and Debate Association named him Nevada Educator of the Year. Although a very skilled competitor, Mr. Ginger has always emphasized that speech and debate are primarily ``a vehicle to build character, to be ethical, to be kind, to think big picture and think about others.'' Students who were fortunate to learn from Mr. Ginger agree. Those in the professional world claim Mr. Ginger's classroom lessons still help them keep calm and collected when speaking in public. Most importantly, those students also give Mr. Ginger credit for their ability to make lasting connections and friendships.

The sense of community belonging that Mr. Ginger has given his students is perhaps his most important legacy. He has allowed some of his most talented students to teach within the classroom and has provided an opportunity for former students to come back and speak about the multiple benefits they have reaped from forensics. Thus, a community of skilled debaters

has grown in southern Nevada, including those who have become leaders in a variety of fields all across the country. No matter where their career paths lead them, Mr. Ginger's former students will always remember and cherish the life lessons they learned in his classroom.

I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing Mr. Scott Ginger for his 29 years of service as an educator in the Clark County School District. I admire Mr. Ginger for his incredible ability to inspire and shape the lives of his students and for encouraging cooperation and a sense of community that should be held as a model for all classrooms in our Nation. I celebrate Mr. Ginger's impact in Nevada, and I am proud of his work to enhance young Nevadans' ability to succeed and thrive.

Mr. President, I am proud to stand with my good colleague from New Hampshire and all of my colleagues today in defense of net neutrality.

Net neutrality has leveled the playing field for every American consumer, allowing everyone to access and enjoy an open internet. Thanks to the internet provided by schools and public libraries, students have been able to utilize information available online to enhance their education or help them do their homework.

I have heard from librarians and library administrators from all across Nevada expressing their concerns about the direct negative impact net neutrality's repeal would have on Nevadans. They told me that repealing net neutrality would hamper their ability to provide Nevadans with essential services. According to the Pew Research Center, ``Library users who take advantage of libraries' computers and internet connections are more likely to be young, black, female, and lower income.''

In Nevada, I know students who don't have access to internet at home now go to the library to do their homework. Nevadans applying for jobs currently use the internet in public libraries to connect with employers to submit resumes and job applications. Many Nevadans use the internet and internet access to learn new skills through training resources that are available online.

In November of last year, I received a letter from the Las Vegas- Clark County Library District strongly opposing the repeal of net neutrality. The Las Vegas-Clark County Library District is the largest in the State and serves over 1.6 million people. The letter reads:

Many of our customers, even in the urban areas of the

county, are not able to afford access to the internet at

their homes at all, and rely on public libraries to complete

their school work, research information about starting small

businesses, and whatever else they need to do on the

internet.

Limiting the ability of public libraries to provide fast, reliable internet service means limiting opportunities for Nevadans to thrive.

Through simple online marketing or by using online sales platforms, small businesses have the opportunity to improve their visibility and expand their customer base.

It has become possible for startup companies to get a fair chance at competing in highly saturated markets because of internet accessibility.

It is true in Nevada and all across the country that the internet has opened doors for jobs, businesses, education, innovation, and technology, and net neutrality protections have allowed the country to continue opening those doors.

As access to the internet has exploded, more and more Americans have been empowered to start their own business ventures. More specifically, there has been a sharp growth in women business owners due in large part to a freely accessible, fair and open internet.

As you have heard, between 2007 and 2016, women-owned firms grew at a rate of five times the national average, mirroring the emergence of the internet as a platform for economic growth. For example, Etsy, an online shopping platform, caters to small businesses, 87 percent of which are owned by women.

Just last week, I held a roundtable in Reno with women entrepreneurs. One of their biggest concerns was the repeal of net neutrality and how that would adversely affect their business's profitability and success.

With net neutrality's repeal, business owners, like Katie, who cofounded a tech company in Reno, would have to go up against large corporations that can afford to buy faster internet speeds. This would stifle competition, and it would cripple the growth of small businesses like hers. Katie told me:

It would really be a stifling situation for us, not only

financially, but from an innovation standpoint. Your dollars

have to go to furthering your business, not paying to deliver

it.

Nevada's economic growth depends on the small business owners, like Katie, who invest in our communities, and that is why we can't afford to repeal net neutrality.

Chairman Pai's misguided decision to repeal net neutrality protections threatens to change the internet as we know it. It threatens our small businesses, access to online education, job growth, and innovation by giving those who can afford to pay more the ability to set their own rules.

Nevada's small businesses, local hospitals, public libraries, and disadvantaged communities, among many others, will bear the burden as they become subject to the whims of broadband providers that now have the ability to elevate their own content and pick and choose which websites Nevadans can have access to.

The FCC has a longstanding responsibility of protecting American consumers and the public interest. While Chairman Pai refuses to properly do his job, I urge my colleagues to vote in support of the CRA and stand with all Americans, regardless of their income.

Thank you.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, there is an old saying that ``there is no such thing as a free lunch,'' but what about other things? What about free Spanish language driver's education classes? What about free backpacks, notebooks, pencils, and school supplies in the month before school starts? What about free financial wellness workshops, free turkeys in the week before Thanksgiving?

These thing are all given away at events hosted by the LIBRE Initiative--a self-described grassroots organization dedicated to a ``free and open society.'' The events were held in Latino communities throughout the country, including Las Vegas, Miami, and Orlando.

People attending these events were asked to fill out a questionnaire. Questions included:

``Are you more likely to vote for a Republican or a Democrat in the 2016 election?''

``Do you feel the government should increase or decrease Federal spending in order to improve the economy?''

``What is your name, email address, and telephone number?''

People actually had to hand over their personal data in exchange for the free stuff. So the stuff wasn't really free after all--but close enough, right?

Well, in a career spent as a prosecutor, I have learned one thing: Always follow the money. If you follow the money just one step back, you learn that LIBRE is a shell organization funded by Charles and David Koch, two of the most powerful men in American politics. Charles and David Koch are the owners of Koch Industries, a massive energy company that manufactures, distributes, and refines petroleum. Koch Industries is one of the largest privately held companies in the Nation, with estimated annual revenues of over $100 billion.

What does all this mean? It means the Koch brothers are two very rich men, and there is nothing wrong with that. What is wrong is the way the Koch brothers use their money to hijack our democracy for their own benefit.

The Koch brothers are self-described radicals who believe the government should play no role in Americans' lives. The Koch brothers believe in a world with no Medicare, no Social Security, no Federal minimum wage, no public programs that support families when they fall on hard times, and no rules preventing Koch Industries from polluting our air, drinking water, or our public lands.

The Koch brothers hate environmental regulations because Koch Industries is one of the top 10 worst polluters in the United States. Fewer environmental regulations mean the Koch brothers can obtain bigger financial gains.

To keep their empire afloat, the Koch brothers are not just polluting our environment, they are polluting our political system, and they are polluting our airways with false advertising.

The Kochs want Americans to believe climate change is a conspiracy, despite the global scientific consensus that climate change is caused by burning fossil fuels. Why would they want to cast doubt on scientific fact? Because the Koch brothers sell and burn fossil fuels for a living, and they believe protecting our environment is bad for their bottom line.

To protect their bottom line, the Kochs funnel money through a network of nonprofit organizations, foundations, and shell companies. These companies lobby the government, produce fake research reports, and run ad campaigns to manipulate and deceive the American people.

Buying a democracy does not come cheap, but the Koch brothers are not stingy. In 2010, the year Citizens United opened the floodgates for big money in politics, the Kochs spent $125 million to support Republican candidates who pledged to roll back environmental and consumer protections.

Since the 2010 elections, their influence has grown. They have spent hundreds of millions of dollars supporting candidates who spread lies that climate change is a conspiracy, that immigrants cause crime, and that more money in the Koch brothers' pocket means more money in yours.

Now, the Koch brothers have big plans for the upcoming 2018 election. They have announced they will spend $400 million in the upcoming election cycle--their largest midterm election investment yet. Much of that money will be spent directly targeting Latinos through advertisements, events, and workshops.

The Koch brothers think they can buy the Latino vote, just like they bought the votes of the House Freedom Caucus and so many other Republican politicians, but despite what their ads say, the Koch brothers are not advocates for the Latino community. They are advocates for more money in their own pockets, nothing more.

The Koch brothers have supported some of the most anti-immigrant politicians in America, including Louie Gohmert, Mike Pompeo, Steve King, Russell Pearce, and Kris Kobach. These are the men responsible for policies like Trump's Muslim ban and Arizona's anti-immigrant law,

Mr. President, today I am honored to congratulate the dedicated staff at Clear Channel Outdoor, in Las Vegas, NV, for earning the Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, Director's Community Leadership Award. On April 20, 2018, representatives from Clear Channel Outdoor will join the Federal Bureau of Investigation in Washington, DC, to formally accept this much- deserved recognition.

The FBI's special agents in 56 field offices work closely with the community to conduct investigations and to protect the American people from crimes and acts of extremism. In appreciation, special agents in FBI field offices nominate community leaders and organizations that exemplify their values and those who work tirelessly to assist them in their work to keep the community safe. The Director's Community Leadership Award honors these individuals and organizations for their leadership in combating crime, terrorism, drugs, and violence in America. Earning this award is no easy feat.

This award recognizes Clear Channel Outdoor-Las Vegas for their steadfast efforts to provide digital billboard services that assisted law enforcement in generating thousands of leads and tips, following the tragic and senseless loss of life at the Route 91 Festival on October 1, 2017, in Las Vegas. Clear Channel Outdoor-Las Vegas donated billboard space on digital signs around the city of Las Vegas to expand law enforcement's reach, telling the community, ``If you see something, say something.''

In Las Vegas, the October 1 tragedy shocked our community but also spurred us to action. During that dark time, Las Vegans came together to drop off food and water at the Family Reunification Center, donate blood, and build beautiful memorials to honor those killed. I am proud of how our community came together, of how law enforcement acted to protect lives and ensure that residents and visitors felt protected following such a tragic incident. I am also proud of the Clear Channel Outdoor-Las Vegas staff, who joined as part of our community effort, answering the call to assist local law enforcement and educate our community at large. Clear Channel Outdoor-Las Vegas's actions helped rebuild and strengthen the bonds that make Las Vegas the beautiful place we call home.

I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing Clear Channel Outdoor- Las Vegas for their generosity, their eagerness, and their empathy in helping their fellow citizens and for their endeavors to help our home heal from this senseless tragedy. I celebrate the FBI's recognition of Clear Channel Outdoor-Las Vegas, and I am proud of their work on behalf of law enforcement and the State of Nevada.

Mr. President, along with my colleagues today, I rise to address what has unfortunately become the norm for our kids in schools and across the country.

On October 1 in Las Vegas, we saw the worst mass shooting in the history of this country--innocent concertgoers attending an entertainment venue outdoors. There were 58 killed and 500 injured at the hands of a madman with an assault weapon.

In the past 5 years, we have lost an average of 10 children each year to gun violence in Nevada alone. Today I speak in memory of the 50 children from my home State who will never get the chance to grow up and graduate from high school, pursue their dream job, or even have children of their own.

The names I am about to read aloud were beloved sons, daughters, friends, and classmates whose lives were tragically cut short in the last 3 years:

Clemente, 17 years old, from Las Vegas; Jovanni, 16 years old, from Las Vegas; Terry, a 17-year-old from Reno; Tiris, 17 years old, lived in Las Vegas; Marcus, 3 weeks old, lived in Las Vegas; Anthony, 17 years old from Laughlin; John, 11 months old, from Las Vegas; Anthony, 16 years old, from Las Vegas; Bradley, 4 years old, lived in Las Vegas; a young male victim, 16 years old, from Reno; Giovanni, 14 years old, Las Vegas; another young victim, 16 years old, lived in Las Vegas; Luis, 16 years old, from Las Vegas; another young victim, 15 years old, from West Wendover; Sincere, 12 years old, from Las Vegas; Ethan, 17 years old, from Las Vegas; Angelo, 15 years old, lived in Las Vegas; Benjamin, 17 years old, lived in Las Vegas; a young female victim, 3 years old, from Las Vegas; another male victim, 4 years old, lived in Las Vegas; Jhronne, 17 years old, from Las Vegas; Joshua, 17 years old, from Las Vegas; Xonajuk, 14 years old, from Las Vegas; Anhurak, 9 years old, from Las Vegas; Dalavanh, 15 years old, from Las Vegas; Robert, 17 years old, from Las Vegas; another young female victim, 17 years old, from Reno; and Fabriccio, 13 years old, from Las Vegas.

Across the country students are saying ``Never again'' to another child lost to gun violence, and I ask that this Congress do the same thing.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, I stand today in support of my colleague from Maryland as the 36th State to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment. I couldn't agree more. I think it is time to eradicate discrimination of any kind, so I commend my colleague for standing up today and for his comments.

Mr. President, I stand to talk about an issue that continues in our communities, and it is the issue of housing discrimination.

I recently read an article from the Center for Investigative Journalism about a young woman named Rachelle. At the time, Rachelle was in her early thirties and living in Philadelphia. She was making $60,000 a year as a contractor at Rutgers University. She had savings, good credit, and an undergraduate degree from Northwestern.

When she first went to apply for a home loan, she thought she would be the perfect applicant. On paper, it seemed that way, but a few weeks later, she received an email informing her that her application had been denied.

In the email her broker told her that because she was a contractor and not a full-time employee, her application was too risky for the bank to approve. She was at a loss. She had been planning to purchase a home for years and thought she had done everything right. She then asked her partner, Hanako, to sign on to the application with her. At the time, Hanako was working a few hours a week at the grocery store making $300 a month. That is about $3,600 a year. Hanako tried calling the bank to speak to a loan officer about the application, and to Rachelle's surprise, the loan officer picked up. He was attentive, helpful, and friendly to Hanako. A few weeks later, he approved the couple's loan.

This makes no sense, right? Rachelle was making an income in the upper five figures, $60,000 a year. She was the one with good credit, and she was the one paying for Hanako's health insurance. The difference here was that Rachelle was Black.

This story did not take place in 1930, when it was legal for housing lenders to discriminate on the basis of race. It did not take place in 1968, the year banks were formally banned from using race as a factor in deciding home loan applications. It took place less than 2 years ago, in 2016.

Today, 50 years after the passage of the Fair Housing Act, stories like Rachelle's are all too common. For any person of color who has tried to navigate the housing market, Rachelle's experience is a case of deja vu.

We now know that Rachelle was the victim of redlining. ``Redlining'' is a term that describes the practice of denying goods or services to people on the basis of the color of their skin.

The term originated in the 1930s, when redlining was the official policy of the Federal Housing Administration. Back then, Federal officials divvied up cities and assigned a color to each neighborhood. The color system was supposed to help mortgage lenders know where to invest. Green and blue neighborhoods were home to desirable borrowers with good credit. Yellow or red meant risky borrowers lived here so don't invest. The practice became known as redlining because the FHA would draw red lines on city maps to designate ``bad'' neighborhoods. For the FHA, a bad neighborhood was defined by the color of one's skin.

Redlining was banned in the 1960s, but as we learn from stories like Rachelle's, the practice still goes on under the radar; so much so that in 1975, Congress passed the Housing Mortgage Disclosure Act--HMDA--to help regulators identify when it was going on, but even with the new requirements, redlining continued.

Then, in the 1990s, the financial industry began selling something called the subprime loan. Subprime loans have high fees, adjustable interest rates, and payment shocks--characteristics that made them extremely dangerous. People who weren't approved for traditional loans were offered subprime loans instead.

In 2008, when the market crashed, subprime loan holders saw their interest rates skyrocket. They suddenly became unable to afford to stay in their homes. Who do you think was most likely to hold one of these so-called subprime mortgages? People living in redlined neighborhoods, people of color, people who had been denied access to traditional loans.

My home State of Nevada was one of the hardest hit States in the country by the financial crisis. We had the highest foreclosure rates for 62 straight months. We had the most number of underwater mortgages, and over 219,000 families lost their homes.

Anyone driving through parts of Las Vegas and Reno in 2009 could see boarded up houses, for sale signs, and empty lots everywhere. On many streets, you would see more houses in foreclosure than not, and while all neighborhoods suffered, African-American, Latino, and Asian-Pacific Islander communities were hit the hardest. Entire neighborhoods were hollowed out. Trillions of dollars were lost.

I was the attorney general of Nevada at this time. We did everything we could to fight for homeowners and help them stay in their homes. As this was going on, I asked myself: How could this happen? The Federal Government was supposed to regulate these banks. Where were they? Why didn't they put a stop to these practices before it all came crashing down? The Federal Government was supposed to be the watchdog, but they were letting banks write their own rules.

As attorney general of Nevada, I sued the big banks for their fraudulent practices and secured over $1.9 billion to help homeowners in my State.

In 2010, Federal lawmakers passed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act to ensure that what we saw in 2008 would never happen again. The bill was not perfect, but it did a lot of things right.

It strengthened oversight of the big banks. It made the big banks undergo stress tests and develop bankruptcy plans, and it also strengthened HMDA, the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act. It strengthened reporting requirements to help regulators fight back against discriminatory, racist, redlining practices.

Banks say they don't treat borrowers differently, but the data shows us that is a different story. Redlining remains a major problem for communities of color.

The legislation we are now considering, S. 2155, would roll back Wall Street reform. It includes a section, section 104, that would repeal many of the reporting requirements we added after the financial crisis to prevent housing discrimination. Some rural and low-income census tracks are predominantly served by small lenders.

If this specific loan data is removed from them, government officials, researchers, and the public will not have information on the quality of loans made, nor will they know about the credit scores of the borrowers or even a way to easily track the loans after they are sold to investors.

When I was attorney general, I needed the information on the quality of the loans in the State to protect consumers. Where were the teaser rates and what was the reset? Who were the homeowners who might not be ready to pay $20,000 more on their monthly mortgages? These were the questions I had with no data. With everything we saw 10 years ago, I cannot now believe we are considering restricting access to this kind of data--the kind of data that is important to prevent housing discrimination.

I have seen what happens when we don't have strong enough protections against housing discrimination. This is why I have submitted an amendment to strike section 104 to preserve access to data we need. With better information and protections, we could have prevented a crisis in which 12 million people lost their jobs, in which the banks took the homes of more than 7 million people.

Let's not take away access to this information. Let's not make the same mistakes we made 10 years ago. I urge my colleagues to join me. Vote for fairness, vote for equality, vote for inclusion. Vote for everyone who got burned by the big banks. Vote for folks like Rachelle who just needed a break, who just needed a fair mortgage loan so they could buy their first home. Support my amendment to prevent loan and housing discrimination, to protect the access to data and to protect the progress we made under Wall Street reform.

Thank you.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, it is with a heavy heart that I honor the life and memory of Dana Marshall-Bernstein and express my deepest condolences to her parents, family, and friends.

Dana was diagnosed as a young child with Crohn's disease, which she succumbed to at age 28, but Dana did not allow her disease to define her and instead will be remembered for her infallible spirit, perseverance, strength, and courage. Through her large collection of hats and artistic spirit, Dana brought joy to so many. She was a light in the lives around her, as a ``spiritual warrior,'' giving hope and

support through her work with the southwest chapter of the Crohn's and Colitis Foundation.

Dana lived life to the fullest--skiing, playing piano, creating art, and singing every chance she got. Dana's intelligence, brilliance, amazing sense of humor and wit, loving compassionate heart, and all- around remarkable soul will always be in the hearts and minds of her loving family and in those who had the fortune of knowing her.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, like my colleagues from whom we are hearing today, I also rise to talk about the importance of protecting the Dreamers, not just in the State of Nevada but across this country.

I want to talk specifically about a term that I constantly hear during this debate on how we need to protect Dreamers and at the same time address this issue of ``chain migration.'' I call on my colleagues and President Trump to really stop using that term and to abandon the offensive and misleading term of ``chain migration'' because it paints a picture that does not reflect reality.

Immigrants cannot sponsor their entire families to come here. Our system of family-based immigration allows American citizens and green card holders to petition for some of their immediate family members to join them in the United States. There are numerous steps families must take to legally immigrate to the United States. It is a long and arduous process that leaves husbands, wives, parents, brothers, and sisters waiting for decades. This system is so broken and slow that many people die before they ever have the chance to be reunited with their loved ones again.

So this image of immigrants coming in endless chains across our borders couldn't be further from the truth. For instance, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services is currently processing visa applications for the siblings of U.S. citizens from 1994. That is 24 years ago. This backlog is painful for many American families, like Fely. Fely is an immigrant from the Philippines who arrived in the United States with her husband and her youngest son back in 1989. Her father was a veteran who served in World War II, earned his citizenship, and petitioned to have Fely join him in the U.S.

In the almost three decades since then, Fely has worked tirelessly to reunite with her other children. Now at 80 years old, she is still waiting and hoping that three of her children will make it through the backlog to join her at home. Her story shows us that sponsoring even your closest family members is a lengthy and difficult process. Tragically, Fely's struggle is not uncommon. Thousands of Filipino veterans all across this country are in the same situation.

As a daughter and granddaughter of veterans, I know firsthand that when someone answers the call of duty, family members make sacrifices too. I support Senator Hirono's Filipino Veterans Family Reunification Act, a bill that would expedite the visa process for Filipino World War II veterans' immediate relatives. We should honor the sacrifices that veterans and their families make by passing this bill, not by forcing them to wait in perpetual limbo.

Our immigration system reflects our national commitment to the strength and importance of the family unit. Families are support systems. They pull each other up when someone is in need and pull together their resources. Strong families build strong communities.

Karl is a 20-year-old Filipino-American community organizer born and raised in North Las Vegas. Karl's whole family is committed to community service. While attending high school, Karl's brother volunteers at an organization that serves the homeless. Karl's mother teaches special education in North Las Vegas to low-income children. Karl's dad is a mechanic and a military veteran, having served this country in multiple branches of the armed services. None of them would be here if not for our family-based, legal immigration system.

Some of my Republican colleagues claim to be champions of strong, nuclear families and family values. Yet here we are today, considering a measure that would tear apart families like Karl's, that would leave parents without children, sisters without brothers, and husbands without wives. Why does the party of family values think that is acceptable?

The problem is that the party of Donald Trump is not the party of family values. Donald Trump doesn't care about families. He wants to be able to pick and choose which families get to come in and which have to stay out. The White House immigration plan we are considering would cut legal immigration by up to 44 percent. That is half a million more immigrants who would be banned each year. This is one of the largest xenophobic-driven cuts to legal immigration since the 1920s. It would affect nearly 22 million people over the next five decades. What is going on here? What are they so afraid of?

I recently sat down with immigrant workers in the Senate and the Pentagon who are about to lose their protections from deportation. One of them told me that she left El Salvador after seeing her husband brutally murdered in front of her and her son. She has been working for the Federal Government for the past two decades, serving the very men and women who are preparing to vote to send her back to the country she fled with her children.

I also spoke with a Dreamer who works right here in the Senate cafeteria. She is the sole provider for her three American-citizen children, and she, too, is afraid that under Donald Trump's deportation policy, she is going to be ripped apart from her children and sent back to a country that she fled.

These are the people Donald Trump wants to throw out of their homes. They are not asking for special treatment or handouts or giveaways. They just want to be allowed to stay and work hard and provide for their families. They don't want to have to go back to a place where they will have to live every day in fear for their lives and for their children's lives.

This President will tell you that immigrants are taking jobs. That is a myth. It is a lie that has been spread about every immigrant group in American history, and it has been repeatedly debunked by economic research. According to the National Academy of Sciences National Research Council, a typical immigrant family will pay an estimated $80,000 more in taxes than they receive in public benefits over their lifetime.

Immigrant families bring long-term economic benefits to our country by starting businesses, purchasing property, and supporting the education and achievement of their children. Research shows that immigrants drive growth. They generate new patents at twice the rate of native-born Americans. In 2014, they earned $1.3 trillion and contributed $105 billion in State and local taxes and nearly $224 billion in Federal taxes. Immigrants are 30 percent more likely to start a business in the United States than nonimmigrants, and 18 percent of small business owners in the United States are immigrants. They create jobs right here in the United States. Jobs are not the problem here.

The problem is the color of immigrants' skin. We have a President of the United States who has wondered out loud why we can't have more Whites come to this country. President Trump denies being a racist. For a nonracist, he has done a shockingly good job of cultivating support among White supremacists.

This is not about the color of people's skin, but this is about family. This is about strong nuclear families and family values. I am proud of who I am, where I came from, and I am a descendant of immigrants. But I also learned and believe in strong values and strong family values, and we lead with those values. So our immigration system should reflect our national commitment to the strength and the importance of that family unit and those family values.

It makes no sense to me that we are fighting today to protect these kids and keep them in this country and then take their parents and rip them out of their homes and send them back to a country that they do not want to go to, that they do not call home, and where their safety is called into question. I don't understand that as a family value or as an American value.

So I ask my colleagues, when we are talking about the immigration system

and protecting Dreamers, let's implement commonsense immigration reform. Let's make sure that when we are protecting Dreamers, we are also protecting their family unit and those family values. This is not about pitting parents against their kids or having kids decide whether they should stay here or their parents should.

No child should have to go to school concerned that when they come home, their parents may not be there. I don't know about you, but I went through the public school system in the State of Nevada, and I was always, always comforted with the thought that when I walked through that door, my mother and father would be there. Any other way to treat these children and their families, to me, is inhumane. They are not values that we stand for as Americans, and they are not values that we lead with when we are talking about commonsense reforms to immigration.

So I ask my colleagues: Please, as we go through this debate, remember who we are talking about. There are faces, there are families, there are people behind the very decisions that we make this week.

Thank you.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes.

Mr. President, last September President Trump rescinded the DACA Program. Since that time, nearly 20,000 DACA recipients have lost their status. That number continues to grow. I have posted this sign outside my office so my colleagues can see that 122 Dreamers are losing their status every single day. This chart cannot begin to tell the story of the impact this arbitrary decision has had on Dreamers' lives.

Over the past year, I have held roundtables with Dreamers throughout Nevada. I wanted to hear their concerns, listen to their stories, and make sure they know their rights. Dreamers

are not charts or numbers. They are people. They are amazing. They are putting themselves through school, studying hard, serving in our communities, our churches, and our military--all while working multiple jobs to support their families.

In meeting with them, I have learned that they are their own best advocates. Dreamers deserve the chance to speak for themselves. They deserve better than to be used as pawns in a cynical game. They should not be forced to choose between achieving protection in the only country they have ever known and seeing their families attacked with arbitrary and cruel cuts to our family reunification and diversity visa programs. I am tired of seeing the White House pit people against one another.

Tonight and this week, Congress is about to determine the future of these patriotic young men and women. Before we begin this debate, we need to take a few moments to understand who they are, what they are doing for our country, and what the consequences will be if we fail them. I wish to read a few letters they sent me.

Listen to this letter from Jevi. He is a freshman at Nevada State College. Jevi said:

I was born in Mexico in March 1998 and was brought to the

United States when I was six months old. I recently started

my freshman year at Nevada State College. I am majoring in

Business Administration in the hope that I can open a small

family restaurant someday. I have grown up in Las Vegas my

entire life. It's the city I know, the city that raised me.

It is my home, my only home.

Listen to this letter from Maggie. She wrote:

I came to the United States when I was ten years old. I

faced language barriers when I started elementary school, but

I quickly learned English and excelled as a student. I

graduated from High School in 2007 with $20,000 in academic

scholarships, but couldn't use them because I was

undocumented. After receiving Deferred Action for Childhood

Arrivals in June of 2013, I was able to begin working as a

health care enrollment counselor for Nevada Health Link. In

January 2014, I was accepted to the University of Nevada

Reno, where I continued working to help people access

affordable health care while going to school full time.

That was Maggie. That was her letter to me.

Listen to Francisco. This is his letter to me.

My story is very much like others in this country. I am one

of the 1.5 million undocumented children that were brought to

the United States as minors by their parents. On September

17th, 2012, I applied for Deferred Action, hoping to be

granted a work permit. Around that same time, I learned that

I had been admitted to the University of Nevada, Las

Vegas. On November 5 my work permit arrived. My family and

I all came to tears upon learning the news. I quickly

looked for a job so that I would be able to enroll and

start paying for my school.

That was from Francisco.

Now hear from Anna, who wrote:

I came to the United States with my family, from the

Philippines, at the age of 7. My father left our family in

2001, and our visas expired soon after. I graduated from

Centennial High School in 2008 and started nursing school at

the College of Southern Nevada. I graduated in 2012 and

received my DACA acceptance a year later. I am currently

going on my third year working at University Medical Center .

. . as a pediatric ICU nurse.

These are only four of the stories that I have heard from Dreamers, and there are hundreds of thousands more just like them.

I want to point out that just recently, I received a batch of 32 letters from seventh graders at Bailey Middle School in Las Vegas. To a T, the concern for every single one of these seventh graders was the same thing.

Clarisa, one of these seventh graders, wrote:

I would like to change Trump's decision and let the DACA

program stay so immigrants get to have the life they had

before. My family and friends are all I have in my life. I

don't want to see them go because they cannot go to school or

get a job. Thank you.

That was from Clarisa.

We also have a letter from Andrea G.:

President Trump's decision affects my family, the people I

know, and the community. It affects my family because my two

older siblings were brought here when they were just babies.

It affects people I know because some of my other family

members were brought here as babies. I hope President Trump

does not end DACA. Thank you.

To a T, with regard to all of these letters, all of the information, all of the people with whom I have met both here in the Capitol and in Nevada, these Dreamers are incredible people. They are incredible individuals who are contributing to our communities.

When you hear these stories, you see that this fight is not about charts and numbers or political leverage. This fight is not even about individuals. It is about entire communities. It is not just about what will happen to Jevi and Maggie and Francisco and Anna and all of those families who are connected somehow to those kids at Bailey Middle School. It is about what will happen to their customers, their students, their patients, their employers, their parents, their families, and their friends.

You see, Dreamers are our first responders. They serve in our military. They drive our ambulances. They pray with us in church. They are on the frontlines, teaching our kids and defending our country. What happens when they are not here anymore?

The debate over immigration in this country has focused for too long on misconceptions and stereotypes. Immigrants are not taking our jobs; they are creating them. They are not causing crime; they are putting their lives on the line to fight it. What do we gain by deporting them?

What do we gain when Maggie and Francisco are forced to drop out of school? How do we gain when Anna cannot go back to work in the pediatric ICU?

Jevi has no memory of the country in which he was born. He spent only the first 6 months of his life there. What do we gain when we send him back?

Living in a community means depending on the people around you. It means having neighbors you can turn to in times of need. Dreamers are our neighbors. This is their time of need.

I urge my colleagues to understand who Dreamers really are. Don't pit kids against parents or neighbors against neighbors. This is bigger than partisan politics. It is about human lives. It is time to fight for these families and for keeping these families together, who are an integral part of our communities.

I know many of my colleagues support the Dream Act and reasonable border security measures. Let's get through to the finish line. The American people are watching us, and 80 percent of them want us to help Dreamers. Dreamers belong here, and Dreamers are American. This is our chance to do what is right.

I yield the floor.

Cloture Motion

Mr. President, I rise today with my colleagues to really put a face to what we are talking about here when we in Washington are making decisions that are impacting the real lives of the people back home in our States.

I have to thank my colleague from Illinois, who has not only led the charge on this fight but has never given up for those Dreamers and their families, has really fought to show who they are because they are not numbers. They are real people.

I go home to my State, and on a regular basis I meet with Dreamers and their families, and it is no different. We sit around and we talk and tell stories about their struggle and their fight just to have that American dream. They are crying. Many are afraid to even tell their stories.

The first time I had an opportunity to sit with Dreamers, they had never told their story before because they were too afraid to tell it. They were too afraid that if they told it and left their home that day and went to work or went to school, that when they came back, their parents would not be there. It was the first time they came forward. It is no different now.

This administration and what they are doing is continuing the fear in our communities. That is why now more than ever we have to pass the Dream Act. Since this administration ended DACA, more than 11,000 DACA recipients have lost their status. Each week, 851 Dreamers are losing their protection. If we fail to pass legislation to protect Dreamers, 800,000 kids will be forced to watch their lives fall apart. They will lose their driver's licenses, their health insurance, their scholarships, their student loans, their work permits. They will face the constant threat of being detained, separated from their families, and forced out of the only home they know.

This is not just a crisis for these kids and their families, it is a crisis for our country, and it is a crisis for businesses across America. If Dreamers lose their jobs, employers will incur nearly $3.4 billion in costs. The Center for American Progress estimates that our GDP will shrink by $460.3 billion over the next decade. Over 800 business leaders from companies like Airbnb, Amazon, Facebook, Google, Lyft, and Microsoft have signed a letter to Congress, as you have heard, urging legislators to pass the Dream Act. The value Dreamers add to our economy is apparent to our country's most innovative businesses, it is apparent to religious groups and advocacy organizations all across the Nation. What is it Congress is missing? Why are some Members of this body unable to see all the contributions these kids make?

This is also a moral crisis. We cannot turn our back on Dreamers. We must embrace them. They are living examples of what America stands for as a nation, built through the sweat and hard work of generations of immigrants.

Immigrants are a fundamental part of our communities. They always have been. They have built our railroads, our cities, our highways. They have founded businesses, invented groundbreaking technologies, and discovered lifesaving cures. Blue jeans, hamburgers, ketchup, YouTube, Google, Apple, even America's best idea--our national parks--these are iconic American inventions, and yet they were all created in whole or in part by immigrants.

Immigrants have held public office. One of Nevada's first Senators was an immigrant. His name was James Graham Fair, and he was born to a family in Ireland. His father brought him to the United States when he was a child to escape the potato famine. He grew up on a farm in Illinois and moved to Nevada in the 1850s to get involved in silver mining. He made a fortune when a repository of silver ore in northern Nevada, known as the Comstock Lode, was discovered. The discovery of this silver made him wealthy beyond belief. Overnight, he became one of Nevada's silver kings. He invested his fortune in railroads and real estate and eventually accumulated over $40 million, and that is more than a billion dollars today.

In 1881, he was elected to represent Nevada in the U.S. Senate. In 1882, this Irish immigrant, a man who became a king because of the Comstock Lode, turned his back on other immigrants, and he voted in favor of the Chinese Exclusion Act. The Chinese Exclusion Act was a watershed moment in the history of American immigration policy because it was the first time the Federal Government restricted immigration on the basis of race. I tell you this story because, to me, the Chinese Exclusion Act exemplifies a vicious truth--that immigrants and their descendants are often the ones fighting to keep the next generation of immigrants out. Sadly, this Congress--a group that includes many descendants

of immigrants--is in danger of making the same mistake.

When are we going to acknowledge what basic economics, history, and scientific research have always proven to be true; that immigrants make our economy stronger, that immigrants come to our country and start businesses, apply for patents, create jobs, and invent technologies that change our world.

The 800,000 Dreamers in this country don't want special treatment. They want the chance to live their lives and do all of those things without the fear of deportation looming over their heads. We have a President who is not just refusing to give them that chance but actively spreading lies and hate about who they are. I wish I could say this xenophobia--this hate--is something we have never seen before, but anti-immigrant sentiment is nothing new. These attempts to shut our doors are as old as our Nation itself.

We are a nation of immigrants. We are caught in a vicious cycle. We look to our ancestors for inspiration. We benefit from the contributions of immigrants, but every generation, we default to the arrogance of power and treat immigrants as scapegoats and shut them out.

A teacher from Sparks, NV, recently contacted my office to share the fear and uncertainty kids and families are feeling right now. David wrote:

I teach music at Diedrichsen Elementary School in Sparks,

and my wife is the Assistant Principal at Desert Heights

Elementary in Stead. . . . We are seeing an increase in

stress, acting-out behaviors and absences in our students

from immigrant families. Another friend of mine who teaches

at a school with a large immigrant population has told me

about days when large numbers of children are absent because

of rumors of raids by ICE.

These are the consequences of using immigrants as scapegoats.

We are facing another watershed moment in our country's history. People will ask: Where were you when Dreamers' lives were hanging in the balance? Did you use your voice? Did you speak out?

It is time to stop this cycle. It is time to do the right thing and pass the Dream Act, not just because it will add billions of dollars to our economy but because threats to immigrants are a threat to our communities, our safety, our lives, and the future of this country.

The Dream Act is an investment in our future. Republicans in Congress are looking for a way to reduce the Federal deficit. Well, I have a solution for you. Passing the Dream Act would decrease the Federal deficit by $2.2 billion over 10 years. It turns out that the refrain we always hear that immigrants are taking away jobs is a myth. The economy is not a zero-sum game. Research shows that immigrants drive growth. They generate new patents at twice the rate of native-born Americans. In 2014, they earned $1.3 trillion and contributed $105 billion in State and local taxes and nearly $224 billion in Federal taxes. Immigrants are 30 percent more likely to start a business in the United States than nonimmigrants, and 18 percent of small business owners in the United States are immigrants. In 2007, these small businesses employed an estimated 4.7 million people and generated more than $776 billion in revenue, but this fight is not just about our economy.

At its core, this fight is about 800,000 uncertain futures. When you meet Dreamers like I have, you will see they are not numbers, and they are not graphs. They are hard-working young people who are putting themselves through school and supporting their families.

They are young people like Maria, a Dreamer who was brought to the United States when she was 4 years old. Now, 22, she is working as a teacher and director of the Infant Toddler Program at a Montessori school in Washoe County, NV. She already has an associate's degree, but she plans to enroll in the University of Nevada, Reno to pursue a bachelors in education, human development, and family studies.

Maria sent me a letter to tell me her story, and she wrote:

I, as a Dreamer, am being truly affected by not knowing

what will happen with my future. Since we moved here, I have

learned what the meaning of true work ethic is and how to be

a positive asset to our nation. Being a DACA recipient means

I can never have a criminal record, I pay taxes, I have a

great job teaching our youth, and am still working hard to

continue my education. . . . I am here thanks to the

selflessness and courage my mother showed, and I believe any

parent would do the same for their children without

hesitation. My mother followed all the rules to quickly

become a true hard working member of this nation.

In her letter, Maria told me all she wanted was a chance to follow the rules, show her potential, and continue working as a teacher.

Maria's story is both an immigrant's story and an American story. It is a story about what happens when we give Dreamers a chance. Maria's story is no different from Sergey Brin's, the cofounder of Google who came here from Russia. It is no different from Madeleine Albright's, the first female Secretary of State, an immigrant from Czechoslovakia. It is no different from that of John Muir's, a Scottish immigrant, or that of Joseph Pulitzer's, a Hungarian immigrant, or that of Albert Einstein's, a German refugee.

Dreamers' stories are no different from my own. My grandfather was born in Chihuahua, Mexico. He crossed the Rio Grande to come to this country. He served in our military, became a citizen, married my grandmother, and he raised a family. His son, my father, began his career as a parking attendant at the old Las Vegas Dunes Hotel. He worked his way up through the ranks to become the first Latino on the Clark County Commission and then president of the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority. My mom and dad worked all of their lives so my sister and I could become the first in our family to earn a college degree.

My family taught me that when someone opens a door for you, you hold it open for the next person coming along after, and that is what I am in the Senate to do--to make sure every American gets that same opportunity my grandfather had, that my parents had, and that my sister and I had.

It is time to recognize that Dreamers are Americans, that their stories are no different from any of ours, that by taking away their protections, by allowing them to return to the shadows, we are allowing a vicious cycle to grind 800,000 dreams into the dust. It is time to learn from the mistakes of our predecessors. We must pass the Dream Act before the end of this year.

Thank you for listening.

I yield the floor.