Floor Statements

Mr. President, I have two requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority Leaders.

Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate:

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, the events of Saturday night were horrifying. It is difficult to believe that this is the third time--the third time--President Trump has faced an assassination attempt. And, as we know, the shooter's ambitions in this instance extended even further, to other administration officials and the Vice President.

I am very grateful that tragedy was averted and that all attendees at the dinner are safe, but I remain deeply disturbed by the fact that we are looking at the third such instance now in 2 years.

I am thankful for the many law enforcement officers who responded, particularly those who secured the shooter before he could harm the President or anyone else at the event, and I am particularly thankful for the Capitol Police, who activated quickly to provide support at the scene and helped not only Members but staffers to make their way home safely.

Saturday night's events were a grim reminder of the need for law enforcement. And, incredibly, some of the law enforcement officers who responded are working for a Department that is currently completely unfunded thanks to Democrats' refusal to negotiate on an Appropriations bill.

I very much hope that, after the weekend's events, we can all agree that law enforcement Agencies at the Department of Homeland Security and the entire Department need to be funded as quickly as humanly possible.

On Thursday, we passed the budget resolution, and we are now one step closer to completing a bill to fund border security and immigration enforcement for the next 3 years. So why are we here? Why are we being forced to consider a reconciliation bill to fund border security and immigration enforcement at the Department of Homeland Security? And why are we moving to fund these priorities for the next 3 years?

The answer is because Democrats have refused to fund border security and immigration enforcement. They refused to fund Immigration and Customs Enforcement. They have refused to fund Border Patrol. They have opted not to protect our borders.

Perhaps realizing what an untenable position that they are in-- Democrats have placed themselves in--we have heard a lot of bluster from the Democrat leader on this issue. He would like people to think that we are here because Republicans refused to agree to any ICE reforms and that we somehow prefer funding border security and immigration enforcement through reconciliation. Give me a break.

As the record abundantly--abundantly--reflects, Republicans bent over backward to reach an agreement with Democrats. The White House not only implemented its own ICE reforms after the events in Minnesota, it repeatedly offered Democrats a robust package of legislative reforms.

The Democrat leader had the nerve to mention body cameras the other day, as if Republicans have refused to agree to body cameras.

So let me just refresh his memory. Back in January, Republicans and Democrats had agreed on DHS funding legislation. And do you know what it contained? More money for body cameras. And then when Democrats reneged on our agreement and demanded more, the White House offered Democrats a number of other things including--that is right--still more money for body cameras.

We are here not because Republicans wouldn't agree to accept reforms but because Democrats would not accept any agreement, no matter how substantive.

The record would suggest that they never really wanted one; that they were in search of a talking point, not a solution, a political issue that they could use in November. But I think it remains to be seen how well ``defund law enforcement'' and ``defund the border'' are going to play for them this fall because let's be very clear: That is what this is.

Democrats refuse to fund Immigration and Customs Enforcement at all. They refuse to fund Border Patrol at all. What does that mean? It means they have refused to provide any funding for deporting criminal illegal immigrants, no matter how heinous their crimes. It means they have refused to provide any funding for a physical presence at the border.

I talked about the Biden border crisis on the floor last week, about the 4 years of recordbreaking illegal immigration at the southern border that occurred on President Biden's watch.

Well, what Democrats are opting for now is even worse. At least we had the Border Patrol under President Biden. Now Democrats are reeling--reeling--opting for borders that are entirely open.

The evils of the Biden border crisis are still being felt. Last month, 18-year-old Sheridan Gorman, a college student taking a walk with her friends, was shot by an illegal immigrant who entered the country under President Biden and was released from custody in 2023.

And Sheridan is just one of a number of American women who were killed by illegal immigrants who entered the country during the Biden border crisis.

Millions--millions--of illegal immigrants, some of them dangerous individuals, were released into the interior of the country under President Biden.

The Biden border crisis facilitated the passage of drugs across the southern border. It facilitated the passage of dangerous individuals. It left communities and cities, including blue cities far from the border, overwhelmed with the influx of migrants.

I won't recapitulate everything that I said last week on the Biden border crisis, but it underscores the breathtaking--breathtaking-- irresponsibility of Democrats' current position. Border security and immigration enforcement are crucial--crucial--functions of government. They are essential to maintaining public safety, and Democrats have opted not to fund them at all: No personnel at our borders, no Federal agents taking dangerous criminal illegals off of our streets.

``Open the borders'' and ``defund law enforcement''--that is the position the Democrats now own.

As for Republicans, we will continue to move forward to fund these critical functions of government. As long as we are in charge, we will do everything in our power to ensure that our borders are secure and dangerous criminals are not on our streets.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, yesterday, Republicans moved to begin consideration of a budget resolution to fund law enforcement--Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement--at the Department of Homeland Security.

We have a multistep process ahead of us, but at the end, Republicans will have helped ensure that America's borders are secure and prevented Democrats from defunding these important Agencies.

Bear in mind, that is exactly what Democrats are trying to do here. You remember the cry to ``defund the police''? Well, it is back. Democrats want to defund law enforcement, defund border security, and effectively reopen America's borders to the flood of illegal immigration and criminal activity we saw under the Biden administration.

We have always seen what happens when Democrats embrace open borders. Almost exactly 5 years ago, I was at the southern border with a number of my Republican colleagues. And at the same time, just 2 months into the Biden administration, the signs of crisis were already present.

That March, Border Patrol apprehended more illegal immigrants than it had in a single month in 15 years. Nearly 19,000 unaccompanied children crossed the southern border that month.

And under the Biden administration, thousands of children were placed with unvetted sponsors or turned up missing or unaccounted for or worse.

As we saw on that visit, Border Patrol was overwhelmed. One facility that we visited was at 16 times its allotted capacity, and agents were being pulled off the border to deal with the influx of immigrants, leaving border security operations understaffed.

All of this, as I said, was just 2 months into the Biden administration.

Now, I wish I could say that that is as bad as it got, but unfortunately the situation continued to get worse. Over the next few years, we saw the number

of illegal crossings climb to hundreds of thousands per month, and the Biden administration's catch-and-release policies allowed millions of those individuals to take up residence in our country.

Numerous cities, including many blue cities far from the border like Denver, Chicago, Boston, were overwhelmed with the influx of migrants.

Amid the surge of illegal immigration, the United Nations named the United States-Mexico border the deadliest border crossing in the world as hundreds of immigrants died making the journey through the desert across the Rio Grande.

Meanwhile, the cartels got rich.

A New York Times headline in 2022 read: ``Smuggling Migrants at the Border Now a Billion-Dollar Business.''

And illegal drugs made their way across the border to every corner of America.

The sheriff where I live in Minnehaha, County, SD, said in 2022:

Whatever your thoughts are on immigration, I will tell you

that the fact that our southern border is not secure is

allowing this poison to come into our communities at a level

that we've never seen before.

And we all remember the tragic instances of illegal immigrants murdering American citizens. The lives of young women like Laken Riley were taken by illegal immigrants who came into our country during the Biden administration.

We had a crisis on our hands at the border and in our communities from the earliest days of the Biden administration. And Democrats? Democrats just ignored it.

It wasn't until 2024--by no coincidence, an election year--that Democrats decided it might be a good idea to at least show some interest in border security.

Leader Schumer finally conceded that year:

Most people agree the status quo cannot continue. Our

southern border is in desperate need of more resources.

That was the Democrat leader just 2 years ago.

Our southern border is in desperate need of more resources.

Well, no more. Democrats are back to their cry to defund law enforcement. That is right.

Two years ago, Leader Schumer said the southern border was in ``desperate need of more resources.'' Now he refuses to give any--any-- resources to the southern border.

I have to say, as bad as things got under President Biden, at least we had Border Patrol. Now Democrats seem to think we can do without them. They refuse to fund Border Patrol, the very Agency that is tasked with securing the southern border. They want to defund it.

They refuse to fund Immigration and Customs Enforcement. They are apparently willing to leave our law enforcement unfunded and our border unprotected. You would think Democrats would have learned their lesson from embracing the ``abolish ICE'' and ``defund the police'' crowds.

These kinds of radical positions are exactly why Americans elected Republicans in 2024. But if Democrats want to continue to embrace being the party of ``defund the police'' and open borders, they can do that.

Republicans are going to do the job that the American people elected us to do, and one of the most basic parts of that job is funding the government--the entire government--and securing our borders.

And so as I said, Republicans are moving forward with a budget resolution that will allow us to fund critical functions that Democrats refuse to support: law enforcement, drug interdiction, border security, protecting children--both our own and the unaccompanied minors who suffer human trafficking and worse under Democrats' open border policies.

And to prevent Democrats from deciding that they want to defund law enforcement again in September, we are going to fund these critical functions for the next 3 years. I would love to think that at least some Democrats would rethink their defund law enforcement posture and join us to fund these priorities.

But the party of the Biden border crisis seems still determined to opt for open borders.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the remaining amendment votes related to S. Con. Res. 33 be 10 minutes in length.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following amendments be the next amendments in order: Graham, No. 5281; Hirono, No. 4884; and Hickenlooper, No. 4956.

Mr. President, we have four more amendments in this tranche that we are doing right now, but if we could start to compress this time for votes even more. We are still running close to 20 minutes, and it is a 10-minute vote, so let's try to do it in 10 minutes.

Mr. President, we have a finite list of five amendments. So if everybody could stay in their seats, and we will try and knock them off quickly and do legit 10-minute votes.

Mr. President, I know of no further amendments on the concurrent resolution.

Vote on S. Con. Res. 33

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, before we leave and finish this evening, I would like to take a moment to recognize a departing member of the Republican cloakroom staff Tony Hanagan. He is leaving this Friday after 12 years in the cloakroom and his 12th vote-arama.

Tony, I know a lot of those occurred here in the last 15 months, and I am hoping we didn't push you out the door by forcing you to go through another one. But, seriously, it is hard for me to think of the Republican cloakroom without Tony.

When you become leader, you realize all over again just how indispensable our cloakroom staff are. The command of Senate procedure and the institutional knowledge they bring is as essential to passing legislation as is the votes of our Members.

Since I became leader, I have relied on Tony's expertise on a daily basis, whether we are adopting a UC or I am delivering the wrapup. Tony isn't just smart and knowledgeable; he is also invariably positive, hard-working, and deeply committed to the team--our team here in the Senate--and the sports teams at his beloved Gonzaga College High School here in Washington, DC.

Tony, you have played an indispensable role in the victories we have won for the American people, and I am very grateful for the 12 years you have dedicated to the cloakroom and to this institution. I want to wish you the very best of everything in your future ventures. Wherever you go, I am confident you will excel.

Motion to Reconsider

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session and consider the following nominations en bloc: all nominations on the Secretary's desk in the Foreign Service; that the nominations be confirmed en bloc; that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action and debate, all en bloc; that no further motions be in order to any of the nominations; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action and the Senate then resume legislative session.

Mr. President, I move to proceed to executive session to consider Calendar No. 670.

Mr. President, I send a cloture motion to the desk.

Mr. President, I move to proceed to legislative session.

I move to proceed to Calendar No. 373, S. 4344.

Mr. President, I send a cloture motion to the desk.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 3 p.m. on Monday, April 27; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, morning business be closed and the Senate proceed to executive session and resume consideration of Calendar No. 670, Robert Cekada; further, that the cloture motion with respect to the nomination ripen at 5:30 p.m.

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

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

Mr. President, if it were up to Republicans, we would have finished the appropriations process months ago. We made a lot of progress on restoring the appropriations process this past year.

We had, for the first time in years, actually moved 11 of the 12 appropriations bills across the finish line under regular order, something that literally hadn't been done in years. And I think if you go back to when the last time we did all 12, it might have been 30-some years ago. But that progress was disrupted.

It was disrupted, first, when Democrats shut down the entire Federal Government in the fall. It was disrupted again when Democrats refused to fund the Department of Homeland Security in February. And it was disrupted, yet again, when Democrats walked away from bipartisan talks because they refused to fund law enforcement and border security.

For 67 days now, Democrats have refused to fully fund the Department of Homeland Security. That is unacceptable, and it is why Republicans are going to move forward this week with a budget resolution that will allow us to take up a funding bill for the law enforcement and border security components of DHS.

And to prevent another reckless attempt by Democrats to defund law enforcement when we next take up appropriations, Republicans will fund law enforcement and border security for the next 3 years.

Now, I say ``reckless'' about the Democrats because that is exactly what they are. Democrats are refusing to fund the Agency that protects our Nation's borders. Think about that for a minute. Let that sink in. Democrats are refusing to fund the Agency that protects our Nation's borders.

These are the people who not only stop people attempting to enter our country illegally but defend our Nation against a number of threats. In fiscal year 2025, Border Patrol agents apprehended 460 gang members trying to enter our country illegally. They apprehended 73 known or suspected terrorists--terrorists--illegally crossing our borders. They seized almost 80,000 pounds of illegal drugs.

They are the ones capturing the human smugglers, the drug traffickers, and the criminals engaged in human trafficking, not to mention that they are the ones conducting rescue operations when illegal immigrants are drowning in the Rio Grande or dying of dehydration in the desert.

And Democrats want to defund--defund--this Agency. They want to leave our borders completely unprotected. I would say they want to go back to the days of the Biden border crisis, when you had literally tens and often hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants flooding across our southern border every month. But it seems Democrats may be looking for something even worse.

Democrats are also refusing to fund Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and that is the Agency that removes criminal illegal immigrants from our country like criminals who are in our country because of the open border policies of the Biden administration.

Do Democrats really want to go back to the days when criminal illegal immigrants were often allowed to live freely in our country? We owe it to the families of Laken Riley and too many others to keep our communities safe, and that is what ICE is doing.

The American people support that mission. Democrats apparently don't.

I expect we are going to hear Democrats this week talk about reforming ICE operations. Here is what I don't think they are going to talk about: The White House reformed how ICE operates on its own months ago. On top of that, the White House repeatedly offered Democrats a robust package of legislative reforms, but nothing was ever enough for Democrats. They kept moving the goalpost, and eventually they just walked away.

Democrats may have decided to abdicate their responsibility to fund crucial government Agencies, but Republicans will not do the same. As I said, the budget resolution before us this week will unlock funding for law enforcement and border security at DHS for the next 3 years.

For the past year, Republicans have operated in good faith to fund the Federal Government with--with--Democrats. We made considerable progress and, as I said, passed 11 out of the 12 appropriations bills. And we were on track to pass a bipartisan Department of Homeland Security funding bill until Democrats walked away.

I suspect our Democrat colleagues will cry ``partisanship''--we heard it from the Democrat leader this morning--throughout this process. The Democrat leader had the gall last week and this to accuse Republicans of embarking on a ``partisan circus'' to fund law enforcement and border security. And it would be funny if those words were not so hypocritical.

Democrats--and Democrats alone--alone--have made this process partisan. Republicans bent over backward to work with them, but it was never enough. And we have run out of time to play the Democrats' games. We have a job to do, and Republicans are going to get it done.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, in a moment here, I am going to move to proceed to a budget resolution, but let me just say before I do that that we are in this spot because we tried to appropriate. We tried to fund the DHS Agencies ICE and CBP through the regular order, normal appropriations process--a process which had concluded in a bipartisan deal with Democrats and Republicans both having agreed to fund DHS, an outcome that was walked away from by the Senate Democrats.

Then, because they wanted reforms, we sat down for 45 days, I think it was, and went through a process where Democrats kept coming up with new ideas. The White House kept meeting them. There were a number of reforms that were made by the White House.

Then, subsequent to that, in the negotiation with the Democrats, Republicans here in the Senate and in the House and the White House worked together to try to accommodate more requests for reforms--all of which were met with a resounding no from the Democrats, so much so at one point that there was one offer made by the White House, and the Democrats didn't even respond for 18 days. Eighteen days suggests a lack of seriousness about this issue.

Ultimately, I think what has happened here is the far-left Democrat base in this country has insisted that their leadership not fund the Agencies that are responsible for law enforcement in this country, whether that is the Border Patrol, which has responsibility for ensuring that our border is secure, or ICE, which is responsible for ensuring that illegals who commit criminal acts in this country are deported. Enforcing the laws of this land--that is the job these two Agencies have been charged with, and the Democrats have determined they are not going to fund them.

So essentially, when the Democrat leader talks about Republicans owning something, I will tell you what the Democrats own. The Democrats own the position which they have tried before and failed, and that is open borders, wide-open borders, millions of people coming into this country illegally over the past four years, and defunding the police.

Open borders and defunding the police--that is what the Democrats own. Because of that and their unwillingness to work with us on an appropriations process that provides reforms and funding for those two Agencies, Republicans have been forced to use the budget reconciliation process to ensure that those two Agencies are funded not only for today but in the future because I don't see a universe in which the far-left Democrat base is ever going to let their leaders fund these Agencies that are responsible for law enforcement in this country.

This is defund-the-police. That is simply what it is. So we are going to move to budget reconciliation to ensure that those two Agencies are funded not only for today but for the balance of this administration's term in office.