Floor Statements

Madam President, I want to talk about two of the bills that we just passed unanimously today, and I want to thank my colleagues for passing them through UC. They are important pieces of legislation to Nevada. They are S. 1760, the Apex Area Technical Corrections Act, and S. 2042, the Sloan Canyon Conservation and Horizon Lateral Water Pipeline Act.

The first one, the Apex Area Technical Corrections Act, will streamline the permitting process for new and existing businesses in the Apex Industrial Park in southern Nevada, creating new, good-paying jobs and supporting business growth in North Las Vegas.

I have been to the Apex Industrial Park, and I have seen firsthand the incredible opportunities there. We need to cut redtape and make it easier for new businesses to open their doors and hire hard-working Nevadans. The passage of this legislation today in the Senate will help get us on that path.

The second piece of legislation, which is the Sloan Canyon Conservation and Horizon Lateral Water Pipeline Act, will upgrade the outdated water infrastructure, protecting the water supply for more than 1 million people in southern Nevada.

Right now, almost 40 percent of Las Vegas is served with one water pipeline. A new, updated pipeline will improve the reliability capacity of the existing water system without pulling any more water from Lake Mead. This bill also expands the Sloan Canyon National Conservation Area by more than 9,000 acres, growing this increasingly popular recreation site by almost 20 percent of its existing size.

These necessary improvements will make Nevada's water infrastructure more sustainable and will protect the water supply for generations to come in southern Nevada.

Again, I thank my colleagues for joining me in passing these two pieces of legislation by unanimous consent.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today, along with my colleague from Nevada Senator Jacky Rosen to commemorate 7 years since the deadliest mass shooting in America's recent history. And as you can see from her previous comments, she is always, always fighting for Nevadans, working to protect our families in Nevada. And I am just so proud to be able to work alongside her representing the great State of Nevada.

As you have heard, 7 years ago, people from across the country gathered in Las Vegas for the Route 91 Harvest music festival. These were 3 days of live performances and dancing and fun. My niece was there. And October 1, what was supposed to be a joyous conclusion to the festival turned into a complete nightmare. In just 10 minutes from the window of a nearby hotel, a gunman fired more than 1,000 shots into the festival crowd.

Mr. President, 58 people were killed, and 2 more died later from their injuries. More than 800 were wounded, and thousands of families were forever changed.

Now, I remember sitting with some of them at the reunification center, hoping and praying that their loved ones would return to them. I will tell you what, though, some prayers were never answered, and that was heartbreaking.

But as the city of Las Vegas mourned, we also came together. Neighbors reached out to one another and helped each other heal. Programs were created to help our city cope and move forward. We were resilient because we are ``Vegas Strong.''

Out of tragedy and suffering, there was hope. Let me tell you about something that gives me hope: 3 weeks after the events of October 1, the Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada and Clark County set up the Vegas Strong Resiliency Center as a resource for the survivors of the Route 91 Harvest festival and their families.

After a tragedy like a mass shooting, the families, the victims, and survivors alike have to adjust to a new normal. Imagine living through the horrors of that October night and learning to heal from those injuries or grieving the loss of a loved one whose life was taken so suddenly by a senseless act of violence.

Then imagine, after you have been left with all of that trauma, that you are now faced with the complexity of paying medical bills or dealing with insurance companies. It is overwhelming. And where do you even begin? How are you going to navigate it all through your own emotional stress?

The Vegas Strong Resiliency Center was designed to ensure that families didn't have to go through that process alone. The center brought community partners with different resources to the table to deliver anything that the survivors might need from support groups, to mental health services, to financial advice.

And I have seen some of their great work myself. Their incredible executive director Tennille Pereira shared this story of a survivor of October 1, who, after recovering from being shot that night, could no longer make her way up the stairs to reach her apartment. In response to that, her landlord threatened to evict her. So she got in touch with Vegas Strong Resiliency Center. The center contacted her landlord, got the landlord to back down, and then helped her move to another apartment that was accessible to her.

This is what happens when the community comes together to help each other. The Resiliency Center connected survivors with the resources they need right when they need them. It gave survivors hope, and it helped them find light in the darkness.

In the 7 years since its establishment, the center not only helped survivors of the Route 91 Harvest Festival, but through the lessons learned from that crisis, it actually improved services for victims of violent crime throughout Southern Nevada, and that includes human trafficking survivors, domestic abuse survivors, and even first responders who have post-traumatic stress.

And when Las Vegas was struck by another tragedy last year after a gunman killed three people at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, the staff at the Resiliency Center were able to immediately respond, providing resources and programs for students, families, faculty, and staff.

In January of this year, the Vegas Strong Resiliency Center was renamed the Resiliency and Justice Center, and its mission expanded to serve all survivors of violent crime in Southern Nevada.

They are continuing to grow their staff and their resources, and they are even getting ready to expand their offices. I am so proud to support the work of the Resiliency and Justice Center. At a time when our city was truly shaken to its core, they were there to help us get back on our feet, to help us remember that life goes on after loss, to help us find the strength to rebuild as a community.

And now as we mark 7 years since that terrible evening at the Route 91 Harvest Festival, we also mark 7 years of hope and resilience in the city of Las Vegas.

We hold the victims and their families in our hearts forever, and we remain Vegas Strong.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, today I rise to recognize the 100-year anniversary of the Nevada Association of Counties, also known as NACO. NACO was established in Reno, NV, in 1924 under the name of Nevada County Commissioners' Association. NACO was established when Nevada had a total population of 84,000 residents. Today, NACO represents all 17 counties in Nevada, from Clark County with a population of over 2,000,000 residents, to Esmerelda with a population of less than 1,000 residents. Every year, I make a dedicated effort to visit all 17 Nevada counties because I know how important each community is to our State's economy and culture.

Counties serve as a vital administrative arm of Nevada's State government. Their work is critical, as they play a key role in maintaining records, overseeing courts and law enforcement, supporting fire protection, administering health and welfare assistance, assessing property, collecting taxes, building roads, and conducting elections. Nevada counties perform these important functions and many others through their elected representatives who serve as general purpose government for both unincorporated and incorporated areas, thereby servicing all people within Nevada.

Since 1924, Nevada counties have grown in population, experienced urbanization, and undergone economic evolutions. Over the past 100 years of Nevada's development, NACO has helped county governments to meet this change. NACO's initiative, leadership, and proactive problem solving have helped counties across Nevada act and usher in positive change.

Today, Nevada counties face unique challenges and opportunities. Even though Nevada is one of the most urbanized States in the Nation, the State has a large rural population. NACO continues their legacy of ensuring Nevada county governments have the best opportunity to make positive change and can lead all Nevada communities into the future, no matter their size.

As a representative of all 17 counties in Nevada, NACO plays a large role in ensuring all people within Nevada benefit from local, regional, State, and national decisions. This is accomplished through their continued nonpartisan efforts to provide county governments with educational and support services, advocacy at a State and Federal level and opportunities to make legislative change in the State. I know that our Nevada congressional delegation appreciates working directly with this hard-working organization and its members.

I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing NACO's 100 years of dedicated service to all people within Nevada and NACO's efforts to meet the challenges and opportunities facing Nevada's counties. We look forward to continuing the legacy by working collaboratively for the next hundred years.

Mr. President, I rise in recognition of today's guest Chaplain, Rajan Zed. Mr. Zed is not new to Congress. He was invited in 2007 by Majority Leader Harry Reid to read the first-ever Hindu opening prayer before the U.S. Senate. And he has read opening prayers in the U.S. House of Representatives, various State legislative bodies, county commissions, and city councils all across the United States.

Mr. Zed is a religious leader of the Hindu community in Reno, and he has taken up causes from all over the world. He is president of the Universal Society of Hinduism, an active member of the Nevada Interfaith Association, and a spiritual advisor to the National Association of Interchurch & Interfaith Families.

He has been invited to and participated in the World Economic Forum. He has met with the President of the European Parliament in Brussels to promote interfaith dialogue, and he has received several awards for his contributions to both local and global religious communities.

Outside of his faith leadership, Mr. Zed has been active in the Reno community. He serves on the governing board of directors of the Northern Nevada International Center, the board of directors of the Nevada World Trade Council, the Citizens Advisory Committee of the Regional Transportation Commission, and on the Reno Police Chief Advisory Board.

Mr. President, I am honored to have Mr. Zed back in the U.S. Senate to deliver opening prayers once again today. I welcome him to the U.S. Senate and his beautiful family.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the senior Senator from Ohio be authorized to sign duly enrolled bills or joint resolutions from July 25, 2024, through July 26, 2024.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that privileges of the floor be granted to the following members of Senator Merkley's staff: Christina Suggs and Cheryl Anderson, during the pendency of today's session.

Mr. President, we are now 2 years into a world without Roe v. Wade, a world in which daughters have fewer rights than their mothers and their grandmothers did at their age.

In the 2 years since the Supreme Court overturned Roe, nearly half the States in our country have banned--or effectively banned--access to abortion. Women in those States have extremely limited options for accessing essential healthcare.

For many of these women, their only option for getting the reproductive care they need is going to another State. Last year alone, 171,000 Americans traveled across State lines to access an abortion.

Pro-choice States like Nevada are welcoming these women with open arms and providing them with the essential healthcare their own States have outlawed. In the last 2 years, the number of women coming to Southern Nevada from out of State to get abortion care has doubled.

But even though Nevada is a safe place for women who need healthcare, anti-choice politicians living outside my State are telling women: No, sorry, if you try to travel outside this State, we are going to prosecute anyone who helps you.

Elected officials in States like Tennessee and Texas and Alabama are trying to punish women for leaving their State for reproductive care, as well as anyone who helps them, including their doctors or even their employers. Why? Because for these anti-choice politicians, this is about controlling women.

That is why today I am calling for passage of my Freedom to Travel for Health Care Act. Our legislation reaffirms that women have a fundamental right to interstate travel and makes it crystal clear that States cannot prosecute women--or anyone who helps them--for going to another State to get the critical reproductive care that they need.

The Freedom to Travel for Health Care Act would also empower the Attorney General and anyone impacted to sue the anti-choice politicians who have violated their rights and put theses barbaric restrictions in place. And it would protect healthcare providers in pro-choice States like mine--in Nevada--who help these women traveling from out of State.

Now, I wrote this bill 2 years ago, after the fall of Roe v. Wade, because, like many women across the country, I could see that the anti- choice movement would never stop trying to dismantle women's rights. And we are seeing that play out before our very eyes. We are hearing it today on the floor. We see it in our States.

Last month, Lauren Miller came here to Washington to testify in a Senate subcommittee hearing and tell her story. Lauren was a mother of one and was thrilled to find out that she was pregnant once again, this time with twins. She and her husband couldn't wait to grow their family. But at her 12-week ultrasound, Lauren learned the most devastating news: Half of one of her twins' brains was filled with fluid, and it was not going to survive. Lauren needed to abort this fetus to save the other viable twin and to protect her own life.

The problem was that Lauren lived in Texas, where abortions are almost entirely banned. Lauren's doctors wouldn't even talk to her about having a lifesaving abortion because they were so afraid of Texas's intentionally confusing laws, and they did not want to be prosecuted for practicing medicine to help her.

In her testimony, Lauren said:

My pregnancy was not my own. It belonged to the State.

Even after she ended up in the hospital at risk of organ damage to her kidneys and her brain, she still could not get the care that she needed. Lauren was forced to set aside several days and thousands of dollars while she was terribly ill so that she could fly to Colorado, just to access reproductive healthcare--just to access 21st century medicine.

And if that wasn't enough of a burden, Lauren and her husband were terrified to travel out of State because of Texas's bounty laws. In Texas, private

citizens can be paid by their government if they catch anyone who has helped someone access abortion care.

Oklahoma has adopted a similar law.

This is what happens when we give it to the States. This is what happened with the overturn of Roe v. Wade. When we are talking about States' rights, this is it. These laws mean people seeking abortions have to plan for their out-of-State travel as if they are doing something illegal.

Lauren and her husband had conversations about whether they should leave their cell phones at home and only use cash so they couldn't be tracked--in this day and age, like they were criminals of some sort, all because Lauren was dying from an entirely preventable health issue that she couldn't get care for in her own State.

When my colleagues and I first introduced the Freedom to Travel for Health Care Act, anti-choice Republicans told us we were getting worked up over nothing. When we introduced and reintroduced it last year, anti-choice Republicans still told us we were overreaching. Anti-choice Republicans' main argument continues to be that it is just not necessary, that we are being hysterical, that we need to calm down.

Lauren Miller and her husband weren't being hysterical. She and her healthy son are living proof that we need to protect a woman's right to travel across State lines for abortion care.

My anti-choice colleagues can pretend this isn't happening right under their noses, but women across this country know the truth: Anti- choice politicians want to control women. They don't want women leaving the confines of their States with abortion bans, and they don't want us to have bodily autonomy.

Well, I stand with the vast majority of Americans who believe that politicians have no say in a woman's healthcare decisions. Women like Lauren Miller deserve access to lifesaving care regardless of the State they live in. That is why we must pass the Freedom to Travel for Health Care Act now. This is commonsense legislation to uphold a woman's constitutional right and freedom to interstate travel for healthcare.

Mr. President, as if in legislative session and not withstanding rule XXII, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be discharged from further consideration of S. 2053, the Freedom to Travel for Health Care Act of 2023, and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration; further, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. President, No. 1, let's be very clear: This legislation has nothing to do with shielding bad actors. And, No. 2, mifepristone is a safe and effective drug and has been for over 50 years.

So for my colleagues who have been on this path to limit access to healthcare for women and to reproductive freedom rights, to claim and make this misinformation and these scare tactics, when they are not true, does not do right by women.

Let me just say this. A majority of this country--including men, including Democrats, Republicans, nonpartisans--support the right of a woman to choose. That is what this is about: continuing to fight for those rights.

A woman should have the freedom to access 21st century healthcare. Giving it to the States to make this decision is still giving it to elected officials to be in a room with women when they are making this decision. That is not the answer.

But until we can overturn Dobbs, we need legislation that is going to protect women so they can access this 21st century medication when they need it and come to States like mine without the fear of being prosecuted, and the doctors need to be protected. That is what this is about, and it will always be about giving the freedom to women for their access to healthcare in this country.

And I will tell you this. My colleagues and I will never stop fighting for this. It is too important for our children, our young girls, and their future.

I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to express my deep disappointment of what I just heard, unfortunately, from my Senate colleague from Nebraska, Senator Pete Ricketts, who blocked Senator Heinrich's and mine and Senator Collins' legislation--common sense-- that would save lives. And I am talking about S. 1909, which is the Banning Unlawful Machinegun Parts Act, or what we are calling the BUMP Act.

Now, it is shocking to me that my colleagues aren't willing to move forward on such an important issue. Bump stocks are deadly firearm accessories that turn semiautomatics guns into machineguns, which are illegal, allowing a shooter to fire multiple bullets per second.

Now, my husband and I are gun owners. We don't need a bump stock. And I know any commonsense gun owner doesn't have a bump stock. What do you need it for? They are dangerous. They are incredibly deadly devices that have no place on our streets.

And I will tell you what, I know firsthand the damage that bump stocks can do because, nearly 7 years ago, when I was a brandnew Senator and had just been elected, in 2017, Las Vegas, my hometown, experienced the deadliest mass shooting in American history because of bump stocks.

On October 1, 2017, a gunman opened fire at the Route 91 Harvest Festival in my hometown of Las Vegas. He had outfitted his weapons with bump stocks, allowing him to spray over 1,000 bullets into the crowd of concertgoers. And when I say ``sprayed,'' he was in a hotel room, knocked out the window--and it wasn't just a spray of bullets; it was raining down bullets on concertgoers below. It was intentional.

In 10 minutes--10 minutes with that bump stock--he murdered 58 people.

And 867 total people were wounded. Half of those people, 411, were wounded by gunshots, including 2 who later died as a result of their injuries. Think about that. Almost 470 people hit by bullets in under 10 minutes.

Now, I want you to imagine the terror all of those families must have felt. Unfortunately, I don't have to imagine it because I experienced it. My niece was at that concert that night. And I know exactly where I was when I found out she was there; I know exactly where I was when I found out she was safe.

And later on that evening, I went to the family reunification center and sat with those families who were waiting to hear from the coroner, who was in the back room, whether their loved one was in that back room.

Now, I am thankful that my niece was not hit by one of those bullets. But too many were either killed or hit by bullets or suffered emotional distress because of it.

I will never forget that night. I will never forget those families. It is heartbreaking. You could see their hopelessness in the room at the number of deaths and injuries being reported on TV as it continued to grow, waiting to hear.

I have to explain this because too much happens here in Washington, DC, that we just think, Oh, this is a number, or, This happened in some other community. When I am talking about raining down bullets on concertgoers, think about this: As I talked to the doctors afterwards in the emergency rooms--the people that were injured, because it rained down, it came down on their heads. It came down on their body parts. It came down in devastating locations for people who actually survived that event but were wounded.

Our hospitals were overrun. Nevadans, including me, we stood in line at blood banks for hours because there was such a need for blood in the hospitals for so many who had been injured.

And as I have said, I talked to the doctors treating these injuries, and they described to me the scene that night was like a battlefield--a battlefield, the blood everywhere, the blood on the floor. The people who picked up bodies and took them to emergency rooms, they weren't literally ambulances that were picking these people up; these were concertgoers. These were people who grabbed people to save them, put them in their own vehicles, and took them to the closest hospital.

That was what was happening that night because somebody had a bump stock, because somebody thought it was OK to outfit their guns with bump stocks so they could kill more people in rapid succession.

Now, understanding this--because this happened October 2017. We had a new President at the time; President Trump was the President at the time. Former President Trump directed his administration to ban these bump stocks. And I tell you, President Trump came out to Las Vegas at that time. He saw. He heard.

He banned the devices because he said:

Legal weapons into illegal machine guns.

That is what these bump stocks do: They turn ``legal weapons into illegal machine guns.''

Now, I believe the Supreme Court was wrong to overturn the Trump administration bump stock ban. But now that it has been struck down, it is on Congress to pass legislation to keep our community safe from these deadly devices.

Now, the reason why we went through ATF and the Trump administration asked ATF was because that was the quickest way that we could do it administratively, the quickest way we could take action and keep people safe.

Now, in the most recent decision, Justice Sam Alito said it himself in his concurring opinion in the case. He said it is within Congress's power to make this right. This is from his concurring opinion:

The horrible shooting spree in Las Vegas in 2017 did not

change the statutory text or its meaning. That event

demonstrated that a semiautomatic rifle with a bump stock can

have the same lethal effect as a machine gun.

But an event that highlights the need to amend a law does

not itself change the law's meaning.

And Justice Alito went on to say:

There is a simple remedy for the disparate treatment of

bump stocks and machine guns. Congress can amend the law--and

perhaps would have done so already if ATF had stuck with its

earlier interpretation.

Now that the situation is clear, Congress can act.

So to my colleague from Nebraska, this is not a show vote. If you were here when I was here back then, we were trying to move as quickly as possible to get something done to save lives. First administratively, couldn't do it according to the Court now. I disagree with the Court; this is a machinegun. But the Court now has put it back, back really in our realm to do something about it. And I cannot imagine any one of my colleagues standing there saying they wouldn't want to do the right thing here to continue to save lives. I don't think they want to turn a blind eye to what happened in Las Vegas. I don't think they want to turn a blind eye to the 411 people that were shot at the Route 91 Harvest Festival, the 60 who were murdered by gunfire, and the thousands of families throughout our country whose lives have been tragically upended because of bump stocks.

If we can't do something as Congress and come together in a bipartisan issue that not just Nevadans but people in this country understand, then that is disappointing and irresponsible, and it is negligent. It is negligent.

So to my Republican colleagues, if you want to do something about this and you are not happy with the Bump Stock Act that Martin Heinrich just put forward, which I think addresses all of the issues, then let's figure out how we can get this done because it is our role now to do it. And we shouldn't stop working to right this wrong.

I will tell you, I am going to keep pushing this bill to keep our communities safe. I am going to continue to work with anyone who wants to eradicate bump stocks from this country once and for all.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I understand that there is a bill at the desk, and I ask for its first reading.

Madam President, I now ask for a second reading, and in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I object to my own request.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 735, which is at the desk.

I ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. 4548 introduced earlier today.

I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed, and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 3 p.m. on Monday, June 17; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed; following the conclusion of morning business, the Senate proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the Oler nomination; further, that the cloture motions filed during today's session ripen at 5:30 p.m. on Monday.

Madam President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order, following my remarks.

Mr. President, I rise today because this Saturday marks the 12th anniversary of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy, or DACA, as many know it.

This policy has given hope to so many hard-working individuals who call America home. It has allowed children of immigrants who were brought here as kids to flourish, strengthen our economy, and remain in the only country they have ever really known. These are our children.

When President Obama created DACA in 2012, it was a temporary solution focused on helping young people thrive. And with the establishment of DACA, we told them that if they stayed in school, they worked hard, and they contributed, we would help them stay here. That was a real promise that gave so much hope to thousands of amazing young people.

Now, it has been 12 years, and DACA recipients have done what they promised to do. They have gone to college. They have become part of our workforce. They pay billions of dollars in taxes. And listen to this: 49 percent of the initial group of DACA recipients in 2012 are college educated. As of 2023, there are over 544,000 recipients in the United States. And 10,730 of them live in my home State of Nevada.

But Dreamers aren't percentages and figures. They are people. I have had the honor of meeting many of them, and, let me tell you, these Nevadans make our State stronger. They are teachers. They are doctors, engineers, small business owners, and community leaders. And they have families. And they have spent the last 12 years holding up their end of the bargain, and it is past time for us to hold up ours.

This has been especially urgent in recent years, when litigation challenging DACA and attacks on the program by former President Trump and his allies have caused turmoil for Dreamers in this country. By failing to pass legislation to permanently protect Dreamers and put them on a path to citizenship, we are failing to fulfill our promise to these individuals. We are leaving them behind.

We know that their status in this country, their safety and stability in their homes could change soon because of lawsuits that are still making their way through the courts. Dreamers abide by our laws. They have worked hard for an education, and they contribute to their communities every single day. They have earned their place

in our country and deserve the privilege, protection, and responsibility of citizenship.

Now is the time to pass the Dream Act, to ensure that Dreamers can continue contributing to the only home they have ever known, without living in fear that their lives may be upended.

But here is the deal. At the end of the day, it all comes down to this: My colleagues on the other side of the aisle need to step up, keep their word, and pass a permanent solution to Dreamers.

Now, I wish I didn't have to stand here and give this speech. This is supposed to be a bipartisan issue that we can all get behind. The American people certainly feel that way. But we are running into the same issue over and over again.

How many times have I stood right here on the Senate floor and told stories about the Dreamers I know in my State? And how many times have I called for the Dream Act to pass and pushed to give Dreamers the certainty that they deserve?

I want to be honest with the Dreamers in my State and around the country. The reason we haven't passed that legislation in the Senate yet is because we need bipartisan support.

And some Senate Republicans have said over and over that we need to fix DACA and protect Dreamers. So where are they now? They are turning their backs on people who are depending on them, because the reality is that far-right extremists are only interested in Dreamers when they can use them as political pawns.

First--I remember this--some of my Republican colleagues said they needed to pair a solution for Dreamers with border security. I remember this because we had a real proposal to support border security and protect Dreamers in 2018. And then President Trump said: If you bring me that bipartisan bill, I will sign it into law.

And what did he do? He didn't sign it. He changed his mind.

And then my colleagues on the other side of the aisle said: Wait. Here is what we will do. If you work on border security--if you work on that first and you make some policy changes, then we are willing--then we are willing--to help Dreamers, and we will focus on that afterward.

So just this year--we remember--we had a bipartisan legislation to secure our border that was actually endorsed by the National Border Patrol Council, and the immigration attorneys said it was a great first step. But what happened? Again, former President Trump requested that Senate Republicans tank the bill. And why? So that he could campaign on the chaos and not give a win to this Congress or this current administration.

Well, I will tell you what. Like the Dreamers in my home State and across this country, I am frustrated. I am angry that politics are causing so many Dreamers across the country to put their lives on hold. It is unacceptable. That is not what this Congress--that is not what working with the White House--should be. We should be solving problems in this country, not using people and their families as political pawns.

The time for stalling is over. It is time for my Republican colleagues to uphold their end of this deal and protect Dreamers, because while they tie themselves in knots and play all these political games, hundreds of thousands of lives are hanging in the balance.

These aren't just statistics here in Washington. They are real people in our States, in our communities, with families, contributing to our economy and an essential part of our workforce.

Enough is enough. Let's come together on this and work out a solution that is going to help Dreamers and continue to benefit this country. In 12 years--in 12 years--it is the least we can do for a generation of people who have given everything they have to the United States. I, for one, won't stop trying.

I yield the floor.

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