Floor Statements

If there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand adjourned under the previous order.

Mr. President, following leader remarks, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate resume consideration of S. 744, the comprehensive immigration bill, and that the time until 12 noon be equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees and that I be recognized at 12 noon.

Mr. President, I indicated last night that I was going to create a vote at 11:30 this morning, but Senators Mikulski and Shelby have asked that we put that over a little bit, so we are going to do that at noon because they are having an important markup in the Appropriations Committee.

We will continue to work through amendments to the bill today. Hopefully, we could have, at that time--at noon--a path forward on this legislation. We have a number of amendments that are now pending. We hope to have a way of disposing of those, and I hope there is something that can be worked out. Senator Landrieu and others have indicated they want some amendments, and I hope we can work that out so we can move forward on the bill.

So we will continue to work through the amendments, as I indicated, today. The first rollcall vote, as I have indicated, will be at about noon today.

Mr. President, we have made some significant advances on the historic immigration legislation that is now before us. I am confident and I am hopeful that we can pass this bill. I have indicated on a number of occasions that we are going to do everything within our power to finish this bill before the July 4 recess.

I have had conversations with the Republican leader and other Republican Senators, and, of course, with my Democratic Senators, and I think that is the goal, and I have no reason that we should not be able to meet that goal.

We have made progress on amendments. I expect and I hope that a group of Republican Senators working with the Gang of 8 will come forward with a way that they think we can move forward on this bill dealing with the border. As I have said all along, I am willing to look at any reasonable amendment--I think we all are--and I hope something can be worked out with my Republican colleagues and the Gang of 8.

I have said before, and I say it again, I appreciate very much the Gang of 8 for their diligent work, both in crafting this legislation and in shepherding it through this transparent and thorough process. It goes without saying that the chairman of the committee Senator Leahy has been remarkably focused on how to get this done.

One of my favorite Senators I have had the opportunity to work with over the years is Chuck Grassley, the Senator from Iowa. He is the ranking member of that committee. Even though we disagree on occasion on how to move forward, I never remember having an unpleasant conversation with Chuck Grassley. So I appreciate his working on this.

As I have indicated, he and Senator Leahy do not agree on parts of this immigration bill, but that is the way things are and should be on this legislation--all legislation. But he has been cooperative in helping us meet his expectations and move forward.

Mr. President, a century ago, a person born in the United States could reasonably expect to live to their late forties. I repeat, 100 years ago, a person born in the United States could reasonably expect to live to their late forties. Today, most people born in the United States can live into their late seventies or early eighties. That is the way it is.

Look how things have changed over these last 100 years. Imagine adding more than three decades to life expectancy just in this period of time. This gift is due to a number of reasons. But the most significant reason is we have had 125 years of research done by one of the great institutions of America: the National Institutes of Health.

Due to their research, fewer people die of cancer, for example, each year than the year before. It is stunning, the advances we have made. If one looks at their personal life, the things that happen in their family, think what it would have been a few years ago, such as with a terrible automobile accident or a dread disease like cancer. Think of the work that has been done by these scientists to help us advance the cause of curing people.

Over the last half century, deaths from heart disease and stroke have fallen by 60 percent. That is just in 50 years. Because of the work done, thanks to the Institutes of Health, scientists understand the heart about as well as any part of your body.

Now these wonderful scientists are beginning to study the brain, which is much more complicated than the heart, but still the heart is very complicated. They are going to begin a study to find out everything they can about the brain. The most extensive research project in the world is dealing with the brain, which is going to be-- and it has already started--at the National Institutes of Health.

Because of antiviral therapies developed by NIH-funded projects and researchers, now they have diagnosed HIV/AIDS to the extent that--I was out there on Monday, and I talked to them about that when I first came to the Senate, when someone was diagnosed with AIDS, it was a death sentence. Not anymore because of the work done there. They can count their life expectancy in multiple decades, when in the past it was months.

It would be impossible to count the lives NIH innovation has already saved, and researchers are not close to realizing the limits of modern medicine.

I was fortunate to have the opportunity, as I indicated, to visit the facility on Monday morning. These facilities in Bethesda, MD, are stunningly important to visit, to witness, the fascinating work they do there.

I toured one of the clinics where the best medical researchers in the world are trying to solve the world's most elusive medical mysteries. There are 27 different institutes that make up the National Institutes of Health. They are studying diseases that have yet to be identified, let alone be cured. They have one institute where that is what they deal with. On diseases, they do not know what the cause is.

I met a little girl there who is 7 years old--a beautiful child. They are trying to figure out why she has the problems she has. They have made some progress, but they do not know yet. Once they identify--and they have. They have found reasons why in that young lady and others certain things are missing. I am not a scientist and I cannot probably do justice to this, but there are certain things in the body--gene sequencing in the body--where something is missing or something is added, such as a protein that should not be there. Now they can identify this. It is tremendous that they can do that, but on a number of these diseases they are still--even though they have identified what causes it, they do not know for sure how to fix it. That is what they are doing there.

In addition to the work being conducted by the nearly 6,000 scientists who work there--these are labs located on their campus; it is a huge campus--they award not only the work they do there, but they award thousands of grants each year to more than 300,000 researchers across the country. Most of them are university based, but not all of them.

These scientists are seeking the next breakthrough for treatments they can do with drugs and even cures. They are reaching out for the next advancement that will--to borrow Abraham Lincoln's words--add years to our lives as well as life to our years.

But today the crucial lifesaving work at NIH is in jeopardy. The arbitrary, across-the-board cuts of the mean and arbitrary sequester have hit NIH very hard. The institutes have cut $1.55 billion from their budget this year alone.

Think of the work that is not being done there because of that. The little girl who I met there--think of the work that is not going to be done with little girls and boys like her because, this year alone, $1.5 billion is cut from their program.

What that means, among other things, is that NIH will award 700 fewer grants this year than last, putting the next revolutionary treatment at risk, whatever it might be. And faced with diminished funding opportunities and an uncertain future, promising young scientists are abandoning the research field altogether.

The Director of the National Institutes of Health is Dr. Francis Collins, the father of the gene sequencing that we now look to in the future to curing literally every disease. This wonderful man, who could make a fortune by moving out of his scientific endeavors, has decided that is his life's work. Not only does Dr. Collins feel that way, but everyone who works there. They are doing things to help us, our families, our friends, America, and literally the world.

It is very sad to me that these wonderful people, who are dedicating their lives to not how much money they can make but how much better they can make people feel and what they can do to cure diseases, are looking for other places.

The best friend of someone who works for me here in Washington is one of the leading experts, if not the leading expert, in the world on a disease called melanoma--cancer.

He is not applying for grants anymore at NIH because you cannot do this work on a 1- to 2-year basis; it has to be long-term or you would do not the research. It is happening all over. Not only that, people who work there are leaving the institution.

NIH researchers are currently studying cancer drugs that zero in on a tumor more, with fewer sickening side effects. I say that--sickening side effects.

The Capitol physician, Dr. Brian Monahan, is a wonderful man. He was a professor, taught medicine. He is a Navy admiral. He is board certified in hematology, internal medicine, and oncology. As some know, my wife has been through a pretty brutal bout with breast cancer. He told me, when Landra was really sick lots of time--really, really sick--he said just a few years ago that they had to admit women to the hospital because they could not stop vomiting because of the medicine they were taking. We have made progress. That does not happen often anymore. As sick as my wife was, she was not as sick as she would have been a few years ago.

At this wonderful facility, they are developing a vaccine to fight every strain of influenza without a yearly shot, saving money and lives. A man at the institute there, on a blackboard--really a greenboard--with a piece of chalk, drew a picture which showed me and my staff what happens when influenza strikes and the reason we need now a yearly shot for the flu. But we are very close to having one shot to take care of flu all the time.

This flu is not anything to not worry about. In 1918, 100 million people died because of flu around the world--100 million. We have a couple types of flu right now that are potentially very damaging. These scientists are very close to having a vaccine that will take care of the flu with one shot for always.

They are conducting clinical trials to help identify and treat those at risk of developing early-onset Alzheimer's, leading to more successful treatment of this costly and debilitating disease. Many years ago I was at an event in

Las Vegas. Next to me was a physician. I was a new Senator. He said: You and Congress need to do something about Alzheimer's; otherwise, you are going to bankrupt America. With people living longer, there is more Alzheimer's coming all the time. We have made progress. We still have a long way to go.

These innovations have the possibility not only to save lives but to save us all billions of dollars each year on medical care. The NIH is an intellectual and economic leader the world over. Everybody looks at the NIH as the premier research facility for disease.

But the senseless meat ax, unfair cuts we call sequester, puts all that NIH does at risk. As we, this wonderful, great country of ours, are slashing investments in medical research--slashing--our competitors are redoubling their efforts: China, 25 percent increase in medical research; we are cutting billions. In just 2 years, with the sequester deal, we will cut almost $4 billion. China is increasing theirs by 25 percent; India by 20 percent; South Korea, Germany, Brazil, 10 percent. We are whacking ours, cutting these wonderful scientists. These countries, all they are trying to do is duplicate our success, replicate our success. While they are doing that, we are abandoning investments that brought us to where we are.

But medical innovation does not happen overnight. It takes years of research, years of trial and years of error, quite frankly, years of the process of elimination. One of the institute Directors--we talked about spinal cord injuries. They are making progress with something they thought a few years ago worked really well, but further tests said it works only a little bit, not the way they thought it would.

Even when scientists know the cause of a disease--as I have indicated, they have figured out some of this with gene sequencing--it takes an average of 13 years to develop a drug to treat that. These shortsighted cuts in the research funding will cost us valuable cures tomorrow. While these costs may not be felt this month, this year, or even this decade, their long-term consequences will be grave.

Now, we say it may not be felt this month. To the scientists working there, they are going to feel it very quickly because some of them are leaving. Imagine if we had neglected our commitment to finding effective treatments for cancer, heart disease, or stroke a few decades ago. Imagine if we had abandoned investments in treatment for HIV/AIDS in the 1980s and 1990s. Think of the burden that would have been not only on the people who were sick and dying but the burden it would have been on our economy because of the huge cost, the lost time at work, and all the medical stuff. We do not have to worry about that anymore. Imagine lives cut short.

We can all agree that reducing our deficit is a valuable goal. We have done a good job--$2.5 trillion. But we should reduce the deficit by making smart investments, not by the making shortsighted cuts that cause pain and suffering and death. There is simply no price tag you can put on that.

Mr. President, I have not heard all of my friend's statement. We have a list of 27 amendments that the chair has come up with that are noncontroversial. One of them I was surprised we could not put on the list because a Republican Senator objected because they thought it was controversial that we should do things in this bill, the immigration bill, for the best interests of the child. That is controversial. That surprised me.

While Senator Landrieu was here on the floor last night, we had a colloquy back and forth for a little bit. My friend the chairman of the committee and I can lament about the days when we would bring a bill to the floor and--the Energy and Water appropriations bill. The two of us have been longtime members of the Appropriations Committee. Senators Bennett, Johnson, and I, Pete Domenici, when he was the ranking member with me--we would do the Energy and Water bill in a couple of hours, a bill that was extremely important for the country. It provided security for nuclear weaponry. But now we do not do that anymore. We have 27 amendments here. It is a sad commentary on things. But these things would be accepted not in a managers' amendment, they would just be done by unanimous consent. But, anyway, we cannot do that.

Mr. President, I call for regular order with respect to the Cornyn amendment No. 1251.

I move to table the Cornyn amendment. I ask unanimous consent that there be 2 minutes equally divided prior to the vote on my motion to table.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, the managers of this bill and floor staff are working to try to come up with a path forward on this legislation.

We have a number of Senators who are concerned about amendments that they feel are not controversial, and that is one track we are trying to come up with.

The other track is a number of Senators are working with the Gang of 8 to come up with a major amendment dealing with, as I understand, border security and a number of other things. I am also told that amendment is being drafted by legislative counsel. So I hope we can have that amendment soon so people can look at it, and I hope we can do something with the noncontroversial amendments.

In the meantime, we have to understand this is not easy to do. But I think we have a path forward. I am grateful to everyone for being as understanding as they are, because legislation is not easy, especially on a major piece of legislation such as this.

But I do say this: This is not one of those bills that suddenly appeared on the Senate floor. People have been working on this legislation for months. For months the Gang of 8 has been working on this. We had one of the most thorough markups in recent history in the Senate. Hundreds of amendments were considered, scores were accepted-- Democratic amendments, Republican amendments. So this legislation we have on the floor is not as if suddenly it is here and not much has been done about it.

Again, I repeat what I said before: We are trying to find a way forward.

Mr. President, in the meantime, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Toomey, Senator Landrieu, and then Senator Cruz be recognized for 10 minutes each in the sequence I just mentioned.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the time until 4 p.m. be equally divided between the two leaders or their designees and that I be recognized at 4 p.m.

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

Madam President, what is the pending amendment?

I raise a point of order against the Vitter amendment that it is improperly drafted to the Leahy amendment.

The Vitter amendment falls; is that right?

Madam President, I now ask unanimous consent that there be a period of debate only until 6:30 p.m., with the time equally divided between the two leaders or their designees, and that I be recognized at 6:30 this evening.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the period for debate only be extended for 1 hour, until 7:30, with the time equally divided.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the time for debate only be extended until 8:30 and that I be recognized at that time.

And that we would have the time equally divided between the majority and the minority for the next hour.

I would also say this: The amendment we have been waiting for I think is done. We finally got the last signoff just a few minutes ago.

To extend the time for debate only until 8:30 with the time equally divided.

Mr. President, I appreciate the distinguished chairman of the committee for saying some nice things about me, but my involvement in this is minimal compared to many other people.

Mr. President, if we have someone suggest the absence of a quorum over the next 2 minutes, I ask unanimous consent that the time be equally divided.

Are there any other questions anyone has?

Has the Senator from Alabama heard now? It is that we extend the time for debate only equally divided between the majority and minority until 8:30 tonight.

I note the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the previous order be extended; that is, that there be 1 additional hour for debate only equally divided between the two parties; and that any quorum calls during this period of time be charged to both sides.

Mr. President, the previous order said I would be recognized when the time ran out. So I ask that it be the case that I be recognized at 9:30.

The hour of 9:30 being momentarily here, I ask unanimous consent that the prior agreement that was in effect the last hour be continued for another hour until 10:30. It means I will be recognized at 10:30, that we will--this will be for debate only, the time will be divided between the two sides, and that any quorums called during the hour will be equally divided.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to a period of morning business with Senators allowed to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. President, for the benefit of all Senators and staff, people have worked very hard. Lots of Senators, 20 Senators, have been involved, and many more off and on, but 20 on a continual basis all day today and even last night. The amendment is ready but we have to make sure it is truly ready. I have been to a few of these rodeos, and we want to make sure the amendment that has been worked on all day is going to be one that is the final one. We don't want to have an amendment and then have to deal with it in some other way.

So what we are going to do tomorrow is we are going to come in at 10:30 and, hopefully, at that time we will be in a position to move forward on this legislation. Right now, it seems it would be senseless for us to stay any longer tonight because it is simply not going to be ready before midnight.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to S. Res. 179 and S. Res. 180.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolutions be agreed to and the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table en bloc, with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 10:30 a.m., Friday, June 21; that following the prayer and pledge the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; and that following any leader remarks, the Senate resume consideration of S. 744, the immigration bill.

Mr. President, I really appreciate the Presiding Officer being here for this extended period of time. I am very grateful, and, as always, the State of Maine is very fortunate to have such an accomplished statesman in the Senate.

If there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand adjourned under the previous order.

Mr. President, following the leader remarks of myself and Senator McConnell the Senate will be in morning business for an hour. The Republicans will control the first half, the majority the final half. Following that morning business the Senate will resume consideration of the immigration bill.

We have in order a number of amendments that are now pending. I would hope the managers of this bill will work to get time agreements set for these amendments and we will work out a time to do these as quickly as we can. But if we have to have an agreement to move forward on these amendments--and I would suggest I do not want and I do not think we should have to move to table any of the amendments or anything like that; I think we should be able to have votes on these--I look forward to the managers working out a time agreement on these amendments so we can move forward and move on to something else on this bill as quickly as possible.

Mr. President, the life of a young woman by the name of Roxanna began as an immigration success story. Her parents came from Cuba in the 1950s, and they raised their daughter to appreciate the freedoms and opportunities available to her. That was because she was born in the United States. Roxanna was born in the United States. She is an American citizen.

She wrote to me last month. Here is what she said:

I am proud to say that this country has always been my

home.

But when she met her husband Genaro, she saw a different side of the American immigration system. He came to the United States 15 years ago, and he did not have proper documentation, proper paperwork.

He left Mexico for the same reasons Roxanna's parents left Cuba--to try, to try really hard to build a better life. He worked tremendously long hours when he got here, doing odd jobs for not very much--a few dollars a day, to be honest.

Then he moved to Nevada, got a job doing construction, did a little better, and there he did real well because he met Roxanna.

They married in 2003 and soon petitioned to have his undocumented status changed, adjusted. Although they initially received a letter from immigration officials that gave them hope, they have lived in limbo now for 10 years. Because he is undocumented, he worries every day of being arrested and deported--every day--and he has nightmares every night that he will be separated from the love of his life, his American wife.

This is what she wrote to me in addition to what I have recited earlier:

We pay our taxes. . . . We have never caused any harm to

anyone or been in trouble with the law. We don't stand on

corners asking for money. We work very hard to make ends

meet. . . . We have friends and family here that we love and

[who] love us. Yet [we] still feel like [we're] not wanted

here.

Genaro is one of 11 million people living in America without proper documentation. Many of those 11 million are the parents, siblings, or spouses of U.S. citizens. Some of them overstayed

their visas. Some crossed the border illegally. Others were brought here by their parents when they were only children. I recited 2 days ago one example in Las Vegas: a 7-month-old when she came here, carried on her father's shoulders.

But regardless of how they got here or why they lack the proper documents, these 11 million people play a crucial role in our economy and a vital role in our communities.

That was proven last night at 5 o'clock when the Congressional Budget Office--this nonpartisan arm we look to for direction of what things cost and do not cost here on Capitol Hill with our legislation--issued a statement yesterday that this bill that is on the floor today certainly is good for the economy. As I will say a couple times during my brief remarks here, it is going to, over the next two decades--what is left in this one and the next decade--reduce the deficit in America by almost $1 trillion.

Of course, as we have said here previous to getting the report from CBO, this legislation is good for the economy and good for security. That is a good package.

These 11 million people need a pathway to get right with the law. The commonsense, bipartisan reform proposal before the Senate will help them do just that. It will reduce illegal immigration by strengthening our borders, it will fix our broken legal immigration system, and it will crack down on unscrupulous employers who provide an incentive to come here illegally and take, in many instances, tremendous advantage of these people who are desperate.

This measure that is now on the Senate floor provides a route to earned citizenship--earned citizenship--for 11 million people who are already here. Some have been here for a long time. The process for them is not easy. They do not go to the front of the line. They go to the back of the line. But they at least are in the line. They will have to work, pay taxes, stay out of trouble, and work on English.

This legislation will also recognize that the alternative to earned citizenship; that is, deporting 11 million people, is simply not sensible. We do not have the money. We cannot do it fiscally and we cannot do it physically, and that is for sure.

Detaining and deporting every unauthorized immigrant would cost more each year than the entire budget for the Department of Homeland Security. And not only is mass deportation impractical--not to mention cruel--it is the wrong approach for our economy--again, a trillion- dollar reduction in our deficit if we pass this bill, which we will here in the Senate.

Immigration reform that includes a roadmap to citizenship will boost our national economy, I repeat, and increase our security.

Helping 8 million immigrants who are already working--of the 11 million who are here, they are working, some, as we heard from Roxanna, in jobs that are not that great, but they are working. As she says, they are already working. They need to get right with the law. And it will mean billions of new revenue for our country. It will mean every U.S. resident pays his or her fair share.

That is one reason an overwhelming majority of Americans support the legislation that is on the floor--not 51 to 49--an overwhelming number of Americans, Democrats, Independents, and Republicans.

But immigration reform is not just an economic issue. It is a moral issue. This bipartisan proposal will allow immigrants to stay with those they love, with their U.S. citizen children in many instances, siblings and spouses. It will allow Genaro to stay with his American wife.

This is Roxanna's final plea to me in this letter that she wrote:

I pray that you would open your hearts to the millions like

me. . . . All we ask is a chance [at] a pathway to

citizenship and the peace of mind to live our lives as

meaningful citizens of this great country.

Her country, my country, our country.

I urge all my Senators on this side of the aisle, as we say, and the Republican Senators to keep her wish, her prayer--a prayer and a wish she shares with 11 million human beings who are here in America today. This prayer, this wish, should be in all of our minds and in our hearts the next few days.

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

Mr. President, it is my understanding regular order would be my calling up Paul amendment No. 1200, as modified.

I so move.

I move to table the Paul amendment. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, has the matter just voted on been tabled?

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the time until 4:25 p.m. be equally divided between the two leaders or their designees, with Senator Sessions controlling 7 minutes of the Republican time, and this be for debate on the following amendments: Manchin No. 1268, Lee No. 1208, as modified, with the changes at the desk, Pryor No. 1298, Heller No. 1227, and Merkley No. 1237, as modified.

We still have a number of other amendments the managers are working on and we will get to those later, or try to at least.

Continuing my request: At 4:25 p.m. the Senate will proceed to votes in relation to the amendments in the order listed; that the amendments be subject to a 60-affirmative-vote threshold; that there be 2 minutes equally divided prior to each vote and all after the first vote be 10 minutes in duration.

I would say through the Chair to my dear friend from Louisiana, the managers have been working through these amendments. I know my friend says there is no opposition. Having said that, that doesn't mean there isn't opposition.

We have a number of people trying to get amendments on the list. We will continue to work on that. It is not because the managers haven't tried.

Mr. President, I would ask my request be modified to have the vote start at 4:35 rather than 4:25; otherwise, Senator Sessions will not have time.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at a time to be determined by me, in consultation with Senator McConnell, the Senate proceed to executive session to consider Calendar No. 182; that there be 2 minutes for debate equally divided in the

usual form; that following the use or yielding back of time, the Senate proceed to vote with no intervening action or debate on the nomination; that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate; that no further motions be in order; that any related statements be printed in the Record; that President Obama be immediately notified of the Senate's action and the Senate then resume legislative session.

It is Michael Froman to be U.S. Trade Representative.

Mr. President, unless Senator McConnell objects, we will have a vote right after this batch of votes.

I yield it back.

For the information of all Senators, following the disposition of the Merkley amendment, the Senate will consider the Froman nomination.

Amendment No. 1237, as Modified

I apologize to everyone for not mentioning this before. We are very close to coming up with an agreement that the managers have developed, along with our able staff, to have a series of amendments in order. As things are now contemplated, we would debate those tonight and in the morning and have some votes starting at 2:15. Hopefully tonight and in the morning we will add to what we are going to agree to later so that we would have even more amendments. It is my understanding that there is already contemplation of some important work in the morning.

In short, I don't think we will have any more votes tonight after this one we are going to take on the Froman nomination. We are going to have a consent agreement to put a number of amendments in order and start those. There are four or five--I don't remember the exact number. We will start those votes at 2:15 and continue working on this important legislation.

I can remember when the Senator first came here 10 years ago, approximately. There was an issue dealing with the military. Mary Landrieu was a new Senator. She was over here, she had her desk on the other side, and she went on, and, wow, it was quite an impressive speech. For a long time after that, I called her Military Mary.

The reason that it is such a memorable time for me is her good father, ``Moon'' Landrieu, was watching his daughter. I called him and told him what a great job she had done. Of course, he was very proud of all 10 of his children but especially that night of his daughter Mary.

I have no problem with Mary Landrieu coming to the floor and doing what she thinks is appropriate. She is absolutely right. We have a lot of trouble now getting simple things done. On a bill like this, it used to be that we would have two managers, whip through all these amendments. We would just accept them. I mean, I listened to Senator Landrieu talk about the best interests of the child. Who in the world would oppose that?

The problem we have is that if we get a lot of amendments pending, it will be hard to get rid of them. So Senator Leahy, who is a very experienced legislator, Senator Grassley, their staffs, I hope what Senator Landrieu has done is maybe to give the impetus to do what we used to do routinely; that is, the amendments that couldn't be taken care of on the floor would be in what was called a managers' amendment where the two managers would agree on matters most of which were noncontroversial. Sometimes there was a little trading going on--this is a Republican amendment, this is a Democratic amendment; we don't totally love this one, we don't totally love that one, but let's put it together and have that be part of the managers' package. We haven't done that much anymore. We can't agree even on the simple things. She is right.

So I hope, Mr. President, that the night will bring the ability for us to move to these amendments of hers or have a managers' package. I am here to inform the Senate that one of my goals is to work very hard to try to finish as much of this bill as we can as soon as we can. I have told everyone many times we are going to finish the immigration bill before we leave for the July 4 recess. We are going to do that. I hope we don't have to work this Friday, Saturday, and Sunday. I hope that is the case, but right now we don't know. The odds right now are that is where we are headed.

I am going to come tomorrow morning at 11:30 and be recognized, and I will move to table one of the pending amendments. That will get everybody over here, and maybe in the light of the day, prior to noon, people will be more reasonable. By that time maybe I will have a better idea as to how we are going to move forward.

As I have said in the past, we can file cloture Friday, Saturday, or Sunday or maybe even Monday. But right now it looks like we may have to move that up a day and maybe I will have to file cloture on something tomorrow.

So I have really appreciated everyone's movement on this bill today. I think basically there is a good feel there is an end in sight. We have a number of Senators who have been working with the Gang of 8 to come up with some suggestions and, hopefully, they will have an amendment they can offer tomorrow sometime that will put forth what they think they need to improve this bill.

The focus for the last several days has been on border security. So let's see what they have to offer on border security. The one thing everyone has to understand is, while I am happy to look at anything they think will help border security, it cannot get in the way and take away from this bill a pathway to citizenship, which the American people want.

So we are going to continue working. Staff will work on it all night. The managers of this bill and others interested in this bill will work on it. There are calls being made to the White House tonight. So at 11:30 tomorrow I will come in and see if we have a path forward to getting this bill in a position where we can finish it next week without working the weekend. But if we can't, the weekend is still in play.

Of course.

Mr. President, to my friend from Louisiana, I reiterate what I said earlier: I understand her concern. The only thing I would say in regard to her statement is, she wants to do things in the normal way. I am sad to report the normal way is what we have been doing the last 6 or 8 months. And that is the sad commentary that this has become the normal way.

I will be happy to review that list. I will do it looking at every amendment. There are some people, you know, who don't want this bill to pass. They don't want to do anything to improve the bill. No matter what side you are on, these are people who offered these amendments in good faith that they believe will improve the bill. But understand some people don't want the bill improved; they just want the bill to go away.

So I will work on this. I haven't talked to Senator Leahy tonight, but I will. I talked to Senator Grassley earlier today. So I heard the Senator loudly and clearly, and I will do the best I can.