Floor Statements

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

Mr. President, I apologize to everyone for having to wait. We were trying to get some things cleared, and it didn't work.

I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 2 p.m. on Monday, June 17; 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 be in a period of morning business until 5 p.m., with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each; that following morning business, the Senate proceed to executive session under the previous order; finally, that when the Senate resumes legislative session following the vote on the Gonzales nomination, the Senate resume consideration of S. 744, the immigration bill.

Mr. President, the next rollcall vote will be at 5:30 p.m. on Monday.

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 the Senate will be in a period of morning business for 1 hour. The majority will control the first half and the Republicans the final half.

Following morning business the Senate will resume consideration of S. 744, which is the immigration bill. Today we will work through amendments on the bill. Senators will be notified when votes are scheduled.

Mr. President, last night the Senate advanced a bipartisan immigration reform bill that will be good for national security and very good for our economy. It will be good for American citizens as well as those who aspire to one day become citizens.

It is truly gratifying to see the momentum behind this commonsense reform proposal. Eighty-four Senators voted to adopt the motion to proceed to this legislation--a very strong vote. By comparison, the Senate failed to advance an immigration reform bill just 6 years ago when only 46 Senators voted to end debate on that measure.

It is a sign of progress that the legislation now before the Senate has not been stopped procedurally. I hope we are allowed to proceed on this legislation without being blocked by some arcane Senate rule and that we can finish this legislation and send it to the House of Representatives.

I applaud the Gang of 8 for their bipartisan proposal. That is how the Senate used to work. They worked hard. They have worked through hundreds of different proposals. After the Gang of 8 finished their work, they took it before the Judiciary Committee. There were over 100 amendments--many more than 100 amendments. They adopted 46, and some 40 amendments were Republican amendments that were adopted. Chairman Leahy conducted a fair markup, and no one disputes that. So I commend the Gang of 8 for allowing the bill to get to the Judiciary Committee, and I thank the Judiciary Committee for now giving us this proposal and bringing it to the floor, and now Democrats allowing us to proceed on this legislation, as well as Republicans.

Our goal now is to pass the strongest legislation possible, with as many votes as possible, while staying true to our principles, then await what the House is going to do. The Speaker has said he wants a bill that will allow the Democrats to vote. That is good news because in the House, for the last two Congresses, there have been very few opportunities for the Democrats to vote on substantive legislation.

The Speaker has said he will only allow legislation to pass over there that has a majority of the majority. That means only Republicans. If they don't have enough Republican votes, they are not going to bring up a bill for a vote. So I am very pleased the Speaker would say that. It is important we understand the procedure we have used for 230-plus years in this body: We pass something here, they pass something in the House, we go to conference and work out our differences.

So I understand we have a long road before us and more work will be necessary to get this bill across the finish line. I truly understand that. I know some of my Republican colleagues will

support this bill if they feel confident what is in the bill adequately addresses the need to secure our borders. I agree the legislation focused on border security a lot. I think that is important, and I am glad it did.

Reform that takes significant steps to stop illegal crossings is important, and reform that does not take significant steps to stop illegal crossings will fail. That is why I so admire what was done by the Gang of 8 and the Judiciary Committee in regard to that issue. They have done a terrific job on border security.

We should all also acknowledge the progress the Obama administration has already made to secure our borders. Illegal border crossings are down 80 percent. That is no small accomplishment. Yesterday I received a letter from my colleagues, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee Pat Leahy, and the chairman of the Homeland Security Committee Tom Carper, detailing the tremendous strides we have made toward a more secure border.

As described by the Wall Street Journal, illegal entries nationwide are at a four-decade low. We have less crossings now than we had at any time during the last 4 years, and the number of illegal entrants who sneak into the country through the southern border and successfully elude law enforcement--so-called ``got aways'' is what they are called--is down 86 percent. Smarter technology, physical barriers, and double the number of agents on the border have made this achievement possible.

We must ensure those who come to America seeking a better life do so in compliance with our laws. The measure before the Senate builds on the progress we have made by allocating even more resources for border security infrastructure, and that includes patrol bases, unmanned vehicles--yes, drones--helicopters, fixed-wing aircraft, sensors, x- rays, cameras, and more. This legislation also includes additional funding for the prosecution of those who are caught crossing illegally.

The legislation also establishes two strict but attainable statutory border security goals: to prevent 90 percent of illegal entries and to monitor the entire southern border, not just high-risk sectors of the border. Chairman Leahy and Chairman Carper agreed in their letter that this legislation will reduce illegal entries by reforming our legal immigration system.

This legislation will make it virtually impossible for undocumented people to work, so they will no longer have an incentive to enter illegally.

This is what my two colleagues said in their letter:

We need to stop focusing our attention on the symptoms and

start leading with the underlying root causes of illegal

immigration in a way that is tough, practical, and fair.

That says it all. This bill does that.

There is one thing this bill does not do and should not do: It does not and should not make the path to citizenship contingent on attaining border security goals that are impossible to measure. That would leave millions who aspire to become citizens in indefinite limbo. We have to move past this.

Six years ago we tried to do something about it and the situation only got worse. This legislation is critical. If we made those goals impossible, the legislation would be a failure. This would give opponents of citizenship in the Senate an opportunity to prevent our border security goals from being met in order to block the path to citizenship. I am concerned that some who oppose the very idea of reform see these triggers as a backdoor way to undermine the legislation, and we must be very careful in recognizing that people are trying to do that with this legislation now before this body. I believe some Republicans with no intention of voting for the final bill--no intention, regardless of how it is amended--seek to offer amendments with the sole purpose of derailing this vital reform.

I commend Senators--Democrats and Republicans--who sincerely want to make this proposal stronger by enhancing its border security provisions. So I look forward to hearing ideas over the next few days on amendments--ideas to make our country safer and more secure. If that is the intent, we will certainly look at it, and I hope we can move forward as expeditiously as possible.

I am glad colleagues, both Democrats and Republicans, are engaged in this debate and are interested in offering amendments, but I hope those amendments will be constructive in nature. We have come too far and the country needs this legislation too badly to lose sight of our purpose now.

As Martin Luther said, ``Everything that is done in the world is done by hope.'' There is no better example of that than this legislation because hope is what it is all about. As Martin Luther said, ``Everything that is done in the world is done by hope,'' and I certainly believe that regarding this legislation.

Mr. President, I am happy to allow a colloquy between the two Senators--questions or otherwise--but I have a consent request that Senator Grassley and I have been waiting to do for some time. So when we complete our work, I would hope the two Senators would engage in whatever conversation they want. I have also been told that perhaps Senator Leahy, the manager of this bill, may want to say something.

So, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following amendments be in order to be called up before the Senate: Thune No. 1197, Vitter No. 1228, Landrieu No. 1222, and Tester No. 1198; that the time until 4:30 p.m. be equally divided between the two managers or their designees for debate on these amendments and the Grassley amendment No. 1195; that at 4:30 p.m.

the Senate proceed to vote in relation to the Grassley amendment; that upon disposition of the Grassley amendment, the Senate proceed to vote on the four amendments in this agreement in the order listed; that there be no second-degree amendments in order prior to the votes; that all five amendments be subject to a 60-affirmative vote threshold; that there be 2 minutes equally divided in between the votes, and all after the first vote be 10-minute votes.

It is my understanding----

Yes. My friend has a consent request I understand he wants to propose.

Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I am somewhat surprised at this request. How many times have we heard the Republican leader say on this floor and publicly that the new reality in the Senate is 60? So I just thought I was following the direction of the Republican leader. This is what he said. That is why we are having 60 votes on virtually everything. And with this bill--with this bill--no one can in any way suggest this bill is not important and these amendments are not important.

So I care a great deal about my friend, the ranking member of this committee, but I object.

Yes.

Mr. President, a provocative act? If my friend is so interested in regular order, why have we waited 3 months to go to conference on the budget? On the budget. That is regular order. Now, suddenly, when it works to their advantage, I guess, they want to do away with the McConnell rule. What is the McConnell rule? Sixty votes on everything.

Mr. President, I still have the floor. I am sorry we have had this disagreement, but I would say to everybody that there are other ways of having simple-majority votes. If there is an objection to this, we will have to go to that.

Mr. President, I appreciate my friend yielding.

Mr. President, I read into the Record in some detail today a letter that he wrote with Senator Leahy talking about what has gone on in recent years with border security. Our country is very fortunate to have this good man leading our Homeland Security Committee.

There are some Senators I don't know as much about as I do about this man, but we have been together since 1982. He had a sabbatical for 8 years to run the State of Delaware as Governor, but other than that, we have been locked in arms, moving forward.

I appreciate very much his yielding.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to S. Res. 168.

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

Mr. President, I ask we move to S. Res. 169.

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

I ask unanimous consent S. 954 be printed as passed by the Senate.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Appropriations Committee be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 2217; that the papers with respect to the bill be returned to the House of Representatives as requested by the House; and when the bill is received back in the Senate it be referred to the Appropriations Committee, with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 9:30 a.m. tomorrow morning, Thursday, June 13, 2013; that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; and that following leader remarks, the Senate resume consideration of S. 744, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill.

Mr. President, I therefore ask, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, that following the remarks of this distinguished Senator from Delaware, the Senate adjourn under the previous order.

Mr. President, following leader remarks--and today we will hear from Senator McConnell first--the Senate will resume the motion to proceed to the comprehensive immigration legislation. The time until 12:30 will be equally divided and controlled between the proponents and opponents of this legislation.

The Senate will recess from 12:30 until 2:15 to allow for the weekly caucus meetings. At 2:15 there will be a cloture vote to proceed to the immigration legislation. If cloture is invoked, the time until 4 p.m. will be equally divided, and at 4 p.m. there will be a vote on the adoption of the motion to proceed so we can begin debate on that legislation.