Floor Statements

Mr. President, today I want to say a few words about a Chicago icon--and one of the most admired journalists on television-- Joel Weisman. This Friday will be the 40th anniversary of WTTW-Channel 11's longest running show, ``Chicago Tonight: The Week in Review,'' and it will be Joel's farewell broadcast.

Since 1978, Joel has beamed into Chicago's living rooms to help us all digest the news of the week. Throughout the series' four decades, Joel was there every step of the way: Joel has been with WTTW since 1973, starting as its political editor and commentator on ``The Public News Center.'' A lifelong Chicagoan and graduate of the University of Illinois and Chicago-Kent College of Law, Joel has dedicated his career to informing the people of Chicago.

Every Friday night, Joel has welcomed fellow journalists to a roundtable discussion on the critical topics of the week. Oftentimes with humor, Joel has been Chicago's self-described ``reporter, editor, traffic cop, and referee.'' He just has one simple rule: The panelists have to be nonpartisan and diverse. Today, unfortunately, this is hard to find on television, but as he said in his retirement announcement, ``No one in journalism has been given the trust and editorial control of a show for that length of time.'' There is a reason he has been in that chair for 40 years. Joel Weisman has class and is a man of integrity. He insists the show represents just that. Well, I am here today to say, it absolutely does. Joel Weisman is a true newsman.

Joel Weisman has had an amazing career. Prior to joining WTTW, Joel worked for the Gary Post-Tribune, the former Chicago American, Chicago Sun-Times, and was a Midwest correspondent for the Washington Post. His work earned him Emmy, Peter Lisagor, Jacob Scher, and Associated Press awards. He has been inducted into the Silver Circle of the Chicago/ Midwest chapter of the National Academy of Television Arts and Sciences. That is not all. Joel Weisman also has been nominated twice for the Pulitzer Prize for his investigative reporting. If you think there is nothing more Joel can fit into his incredibly busy schedule, you are wrong. In addition to being a fulltime journalist, he also runs a fulltime law practice that specializes in media talent representation.

I want to congratulate Joel Weisman on his distinguished career and thank him on behalf of the city he loves for his outstanding work and service to the Chicagoland area. He loves Chicago, and Chicagoans love him. Although he is retiring, Joel is not staying out of the political conversation. He will continue his service to his community and work as an attorney, focusing on media law. I am heartened that Joel will remain a powerful voice in the community, and I wish him and his family all the best.

Mr. President, first, let me thank my colleague from South Carolina. We have worked together for years, mainly on this issue. I want to tell you that he has demonstrated extraordinary insight and extraordinary courage time and again. I know we wouldn't even be standing here in this conversation without him.

Lindsey, thank you. I know some of the challenges that I have put before you made life more difficult, and I hope you understand that I always knew you wanted to come to yes, you always wanted to fix this problem.

One of the things that you said that I would like to share is the passion we feel on this side of the aisle for the security of America. This morning, I was

invited for a breakfast with Secretary Mattis at the Department of Defense. I was happy to vote for his confirmation. He is another patriot, a man who served as a four-star general in the Marine Corps. I respect him very much, and I want to help him.

As the ranking member of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, I know what these dollar figures mean. It isn't just numbers on a page. We are talking about what Secretary Mattis told us this morning. A delay, another CR--the fourth CR this year--costs the Pentagon millions of dollars--millions of dollars to maintain the same spending level they had last year. That is wasteful.

How many families across America say: I am going to write exactly the same checks in January 2018 that I wrote in January 2017. That is mindless, and that is where you are with a CR. We just keep repeating the same things over and over at great expense.

We owe it to the Department of Defense, we owe it to the men and women of the military, and we owe it to the people we represent to keep this Nation safe.

I agree with Senator Graham. We cannot ignore that there are other things that are priorities and have importance. In the nondefense area, to think that we would shortchange the Department of State--an agency of government which you have responsibility for in the Appropriations Committee--is a shortsighted effort that even Secretary Mattis would be quick to say makes no sense at all. We should be giving our Department of State the resources and people they need to make sure we are dealing at the area of diplomacy as opposed to war. That is just one example. Add the FBI. Add the Department of Homeland Security. They all need to be properly funded.

We cannot run the Government of the United States of America--the strongest and biggest economy in the world, one of the most powerful nations in the world--lurching from week to week and month to month without a budget. For goodness' sake, I plead with the Republican leadership in the House and the Senate, give us something we can work on together. A good place to start this--look for bipartisanship. There are Democrats willing to sit down and work with you to solve the problems. But when we are given a ``take it or leave it'' budget proposal for 4 weeks at a time, it is a terrible way to run a country. I hope the leaders come to that same conclusion.

Let me zero in on the issue that brings most of us to the floor tonight, which was addressed by Senator Graham. I have been at this for a while, a long while. My goal is to make sure that those who were brought to this country as children, who grew up in this country and, as Bob Menendez has said so forcefully and effectively, pledged allegiance to that flag every morning in the classrooms across America--I have been fighting for years to give them a chance to be part of America, the only country many of them have ever known. It has been a struggle.

When I couldn't pass the Dream Act or get 60 votes in the Senate, I went to President Obama and begged him to help, and he did. He created DACA. By Presidential Executive order, he created an opportunity for ultimately 780,000 young people to step up and get protection from deportation and the right to legally work in America. It has been an amazing experience.

As Senator Graham said, it is hard to pick any large population in this country and not end up with some people who would embarrass you or some bad apples, but I will tell you consistently, over and over again, these young people, these Dreamers, these young people protected by DACA, have shown us over and over again why they have earned our confidence and trust. They worked so hard to be part of this country.

Those of us who were lucky enough to be born here never went through what they have gone through--learning that you are undocumented, realizing the doors are closed automatically no matter how good you are and how hard you work--and they kept at it. I want to tell you, we should be proud of them, and we should embrace them as the future of America because they bring so many talents, skills, and good values to our country.

With the DACA Program in place and all the people protected, the new President came in and said: I am going to end it. On September 5 of last year, he announced that it would end as of March 5 this year, and as of October 1, they would stop renewing the DACA protection.

What has happened is that 16,000 of these DACA-protected young people have fallen out of protected status. Luckily, a California court last week said: Keep protecting them until we resolve some of the issues. So they have a temporary, momentary protective order that they can turn to when it comes to this California decision, but there is no certainty of what happens next.

When I hear Senator McConnell and others come to the floor and say there is no hurry, I invite them to meet some of these young people. I met a group in New York. There were about 12 of them in college, DACA- protected. They are working to get through college because they don't qualify for any program assistance because they are undocumented. As they went around the room, they said: Senator, we want to each tell you something.

Five hundred days.

Four hundred and twenty days.

Each one of them was telling me how many days they have left of DACA protection before they were subject to deportation and could no longer legally work in America. To say there is no hurry is to overlook the obvious. These young people are torn apart. Their families are torn apart because of our lack of action.

Senator Graham and I decided to do something about it, and we invited some good friends to join us. On the Democratic side, Michael Bennet of Colorado and Robert Menendez of New Jersey--we have been through this war before when we worked on comprehensive immigration reform. On the Republican side, Senator Gardner of Colorado; Senator Flake of Arizona, who is on the floor; and Senator Graham. And we worked at it for a long, long time. We had moments that looked like we were going to fall apart and never reach a conclusion, and we finally came together.

Last Tuesday, a week ago, when the President invited 26 of us to the White House and made his plea that we do something, we decided to sit down and do it, and we did. In a matter of 24 to 48 hours, we reached a final agreement on this bipartisan approach to deal with this issue of DACA. That is what we presented to the President when we went to the White House last Thursday.

I couldn't agree with Senator Graham more that the President of last Tuesday is the one we need again--that President who said to us that what we are doing is an act of love; that President who said to us: Send me a bill. I will sign it, and I will take the political heat; that President who agreed with us that you couldn't do everything in immigration reform in one bill but you had to divide it. He agreed with that. I agree with him. That is the way we should move forward.

I hope the President listens to Senator Graham and others in his own party and steps up and helps us finish this responsibility.

Let me say a word or two about another effort underway. At that meeting 8 days ago, Tuesday of last week in the White House, there was a suggestion that the leaders in the Senate and the House, both parties, should sit down and see if they can come up with an alternative. That was headed up by Kevin McCarthy of California. I like him. I don't know him well. I have not worked with him on many things. But I will tell you he is a positive person. He is trying to come to a conclusion on something that might work, and we met today in his office to talk about it. At the meeting was Senator Cornyn of Texas, who is the whip of the Republican Senators; myself; and Steny Hoyer, the Democratic whip of the House of Representatives. With us were Gen. John Kelly and Secretary Nielsen of the Department of Homeland Security. We met for about an hour and a half. It was the first attempt at a substantive meeting that we had had since this group started meeting 5 days ago. In the meantime, our staff had met four or five times, but this was the first time that Senators and Congressmen had sat down across the table. Needless to say--and no surprise to all of us because we have been through

this so many times--we really couldn't agree on the basics of how we were to get started here.

I said to Congressman McCarthy, the Republican leader in the House: This is hard work. This is heavy lifting. This takes time. People have to be convinced and have a chance to state their points of view. We don't have that much time. We are dealing with a deadline of January 19, and that happens to be just around the corner, 2 days away. We are also dealing with a deadline of March 5, which, sadly, could be a deadline, if we fail to meet it, that could see many people's lives changed.

I have continued to meet with this group, but I tell them over and over: We already have a bill here in the Senate. We have a bipartisan bill.

We addressed all of the issues that the President raised when we had our meeting in the White House on Tuesday of last week. This is a starting point. In fact, I think it is a good end point for us to point at.

Let me thank Senator Graham for expanding the number of Republican sponsors. I do the math in the Senate. I have said that, as the whip of the Senate, I learned all of the skills I needed for this job in the first grade--how to count to 60. That is what it takes, many times in the Senate, to move controversial issues forward.

We have 49 Democratic Senators. I believe they are all prepared to vote for this compromise that we have before us, this bipartisan compromise. As of today, we have seven Republicans who have joined us in this effort. The math is simple. We have 56 Senators who are ready to move forward on this issue. It will only take four more, and I believe they are there. I have spoken to Republican Senators who have said: Maybe I cannot sponsor it, but I sure want to see it pass.

I think, ultimately, if we are given a chance to vote on this measure and move it forward, we can do it on a bipartisan basis. It will be one of the few times--rare times--that it will happen around this Chamber. In doing that, we are going to solve the problem that the President challenged us with--to replace DACA. It is a good approach, the one that we put together. I don't like all of it, but that is what compromise is all about.

I hope that my colleagues will join me in a bipartisan effort to make sure that before we go home this week, we move forward on this DACA issue so that we can say to these young people: We hear you; we literally feel your pain; and we want to be there to make sure you have a future in America.

I yield the floor.

I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker) and the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Durbin) are necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker), the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Durbin), and the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) are necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker) is necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker) is necessarily absent.

Mr. President, I was necessarily absent for votes relative to the nominations of Michael Lawrence Brown to be a U.S. district judge for the Northern District of Georgia and Walter David Counts III to be a U.S. district judge for the Western District of Texas.

On vote No. 7, had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on confirmation of the Brown nomination.

On vote No. 8, had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on the motion to invoke cloture on the Counts nomination.

(At the request of Mr. Schumer, the following statement was ordered to be printed in the Record.)

I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker) is necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker) is necessarily absent.

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

Mr. President, I come to the floor today to speak about the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program, known as DACA. That was an Executive order of President Obama's which provided temporary legal status to immigrant students and young people if they registered with the government, paid a fee, and passed a criminal and national security background check. It was for 2 years and renewable.

Young people who are protected by DACA are known by some as Dreamers. They came to the United States as children. They grew up singing the ``Star Spangled Banner'' and pledging allegiance to our flag. They believed that they were Americans, but legally, they are not. The average DACA recipient came to the United States at the age of 6 and has been here for approximately 20 years.

It was 7 years ago that I sent a letter to President Obama. I was joined in that letter, incidentally, by Senator Dick Lugar, a Republican from Indiana. In that letter, I asked President Obama: Can you find a way to protect these young people?

We passed the Dream Act on the floor of the House. We passed it on the floor of the Senate. We have never managed to pass it in both Chambers in the same year. And the President created the DACA Program.

The DACA Program has been a success. Approximately 800,000 Dreamers have come forward and received DACA protection. Let's allow them to be part of America as teachers, as nurses, as engineers, as first responders, and even serving in the U.S. military.

But on September 5 of this last year, 2017, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced that the Trump administration was setting out to repeal DACA, to put an end to it. That same day, President Trump called on Congress to come up with a solution to legalize DACA. He challenged us. He said to the U.S. Senate and House: Pass a law. If this is a good idea, pass a law.

It has been more than 4 months since the President issued that challenge. The Republican leadership of Congress has not proposed any legislation to legalize DACA as the President asked.

The deportation clock is ticking for these young people who are protected. Already, 15,000 have lost their DACA status. Beginning on March 5--the deadline that initially was imposed by President Trump-- every day for the next 2 years, 1,000 DACA young people will lose their ability to work legally in the United States and will be subject to being deported from this country.

Who are they? Some 20,000 of them are teachers in our schools who would lose the right to work legally and have to leave their classrooms. Nurses would leave their patients. First responders would leave their posts. And 900 soldiers would lose their ability to volunteer to risk their lives for America's future.

This isn't just a looming humanitarian crisis; it is an economic crisis. More than 91 percent of DACA Dreamers are gainfully employed and paying taxes. Many of them are students; yet they are still gainfully employed because they don't qualify for Federal assistance for higher education, so they have to work jobs, sometimes many jobs.

The nonpartisan Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy reports that DACA-eligible individuals contribute an estimated $2 billion a year in State and local taxes. The Cato Institute, a conservative operation in Washington, estimates that ending DACA and deporting DACA recipients will cost the economy $60 billion and result in a $280 billion reduction in economic growth over the next decade.

Poll after poll shows overwhelming bipartisan support for the Dreamers. FOX News found that 79 percent of Americans support a path to citizenship for Dreamers, including 63 percent of Trump voters.

The answer is clear. It was 16 years ago that I first introduced the DREAM Act--bipartisan legislation to give these young people a path to citizenship. In July of last year, I introduced the most recent version with my colleague, Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. We need to pass the Dream Act, and we need to do it now, before January 19.

Over the years, I have come to the floor to tell the story of the Dreamers. I can give a pretty nice speech here, but these stories tell the story of this issue more than anything I can add to them. These stories show what is at stake when we consider the fate of DACA and the Dream Act.

Today, I want to tell you about this young lady. Her name is Evelyn Valdez-Ward. This is the 107th Dreamer story I have told on the floor. Evelyn was 6 months old when her family brought her from Mexico to Houston, TX. She was quite a good student. She graduated 11th in her high school class of 650. She took all advanced placement classes and was a member of the National Honor Society. She was a member of the color guard in the marching band and regularly volunteered at homeless shelters and animal shelters.

It wasn't until she began to apply for college that she finally learned her immigration status. She wasn't like the other students with whom she had grown up and shared classrooms and experiences. Evelyn is undocumented, but it didn't stop her--she was going to pursue college.

One of her teachers believed in her because she was such a bright student and wrote her a letter of recommendation to go to college. She was accepted into the University of Houston. She received multiple awards while in college, including the Excellence in SI Leadership and Mentoring Award, the American Society of Plant Biology Award for Outstanding Research, and the Outstanding Biology Leadership Award.

The summer after her freshman year, she was offered a great research opportunity through the National Science Foundation. Because of DACA, she was allowed to work legally in the United States, and she was able to pursue this important research. That opportunity was in plant water transport research in California. This is where Evelyn fell in love with ecology and plants.

She graduated magna cum laude in 2016 with a bachelor of science in biology. Today, she is a second-year Ph.D. student at the University of California, Irvine, in the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. She is researching the effects of climate change on the interactions between plants and soil. Evelyn's dream is to continue her research as a scientist and to become an advocate for strategies to mitigate climate change.

In September, the American Association for the Advancement of Science wrote a letter opposing the White House decision to rescind DACA. Here is what they said:

Many DACA students make significant contributions to the

scientific and engineering enterprise in the United States .

. . high-achieving young people in DACA contribute in many

ways to our nation. Many are studying to become scientists,

engineers, medical doctors and entrepreneurs. Given the

administration's decision, we urge Congress to craft

legislation that provides long-term protection for these

young people who seek to continue their education and

contribute to society. . . . Our nation needs an immigration

policy that advances U.S. innovation and prosperity, and

stays true to foundational American goals that seek

contributions to society from all.

The Presiding Officer and I had a unique invitation yesterday. I would just say that as a Member of the House and of the Senate, I have never been invited to a meeting quite like the one we had yesterday with the President in the Cabinet Room of the White House. It was the President's idea. I don't know if it was a spur-of-the-moment idea, but it is one that came together very quickly in a few days.

I think there were almost 26 of us--Democrats, Republicans, House and Senate Members--who were called together by President Trump. I was kind of surprised, but there I was sitting right next to the President of the United States. It was only the third time we had ever spoken. The other two times, incidentally, were about DACA and the Dream Act, as you can probably guess. He invited me to sit next to him as we talked about this issue.

Then he did something that was really unusual. I have been to some meetings with the President in the Cabinet Room with President Obama and President George W. Bush. Usually, what happens is, the cameras come in, the President says a few words, then the staff tells them to leave, and they reluctantly pull out and leave. Yesterday was quite different. The President told the press they could stay, and they did, for almost an hour. The conversations between the President of the United States and Members of Congress were shared with the American people. I had never seen anything quite like it.

I kind of liked it, to be honest with you. I think there was a lot of candor in the room. People were expressing their points of view, and there were many different points of view, but I think I came away from that meeting with more hope than ever that we can do something about DACA and the Dream Act. The President told us he would like to see it done. He added, though, there were things he wanted to be a part of it. One of them dealt with border security, which has been a priority for all of us from the beginning.

We want to establish--both political parties want to establish that we are committed to border security, and we are. How you define it, what it costs, and how it is implemented--some of these things we can define in our agreement; others will be left to future efforts by Congress and the President.

Then he talked about the family unification, and that is an issue that is very delicate. It is one that, as my colleagues can imagine, really hits home.

It is very personal as to whether a member of a family can bring someone they love--some relative in their family--to the United States. Even if they decide to bring them--incidentally, they may be waiting 30 years, in the case of those who are seeking entry into the United States through family visas; 80 years, from China; 160 years from Mexico. Some of these things are unrealistic and will never happen, but to talk about family unification really strikes home with a lot of families.

I want to hear the President's point of view, but I want to deal with this in the most sensitive and sincere way. We don't want to flood the United States with people who are any danger to us, No. 1, or nonproductive citizens, but we certainly want to see families unified.

There is a question about diversity visas. I will not go into it because it is a long story--the creation of this program, where it is today, and where it might be in the future.

Here is what I do believe after yesterday's meeting. I believe President Donald Trump called for that meeting because he wanted to let the American people know he was serious. He wanted to show them he could be a President presiding over a table with 24, 25 Members of Congress from both political parties and tackle a sensitive, delicate, challenging issue. He wants to show the American people he can lead. I want to help him lead if the goal is to make sure DACA and the Dreamers ultimately have their chance to be part of America's future.

I am willing to work in good faith with the President to compromise, whatever it takes, to bring this forward. There are so many lives hanging in the balance, and this is one of them--this wonderful, brilliant young woman who wants to make not only the world a better place but America a better place. She simply wants the chance to be here and be part of America's future. We can give her no less.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

I announce that the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Donnelly) and the Senator from Montana (Mr. Tester) are necessarily absent.

Madam President, years ago, a man with a famous name aspired to be President of the United States. Critics dismissed this idea as ridiculous. One of the leading political columnists of the day wrote that the man's initials stood for ``Feather Duster Roosevelt, a lightweight''--nothing to him.

Al Franken's decision to run for a seat in this Senate from Minnesota was met in many quarters with the same sort of mockery.

Many people said: He is a comedian. He doesn't have the knowledge or the skill or the patience or the vision to be a lawmaker. You can't joke your way into the Senate.

The pundits were wrong about FDR. He was one of our greatest Presidents during one of our darkest hours.

Madam President, the doubters were wrong about Al Franken too. Al Franken has been my friend, my personal friend, for more than two decades. For the last 7-plus years, he has been my colleague in the Senate. He has been a credit to the Senate, a passionate advocate for his home State of Minnesota, a defender of our Constitution, and a determined fighter for justice. He became a better Senator every year. His work in the Senate has made life for millions of people better in Minnesota and far beyond. He and his dedicated staff can take pride in that fact. Al Franken has been and I am sure will continue to be an effective champion for those whose daily struggles too often go unnoticed and unaddressed in the places of power.

During his time in the Senate, Al Franken has always been there when his Senate colleagues asked for help. He was one of the most sought- after voices in our party. He never failed to pack a bag, catch a plane, and spend another night away from his family to help each and every one of us.

Twenty years ago, when I first met him, he was this well known, successful comedian on ``Saturday Night Live'' who happened to play the role of a fellow named Paul Simon, a Senator from Illinois who was my predecessor. Paul Simon invited Al Franken to come to Makanda, IL. It is not even close to Chicago. He agreed on a Sunday afternoon to be there on behalf of my campaign, although we had never met, and he came. He limped onto Paul Simon's front porch, saying: ``I twisted my ankle playing squash.'' I thought it was another perfect example of a reason he could have used to avoid the invitation, but he came anyway. We had a great afternoon and a terrific time with Paul Simon of ``Saturday Night Live'' and the real Paul Simon and a senatorial candidate who was grateful for Al Franken's presence that day.

When people ask me to describe my politics, I say that I follow the gospel of St. Paul. By that, I mean I try to emulate three of my greatest political heroes, who happen to share that name.

The first Senator, Paul Douglas of Illinois, was a champion of honesty, economic justice, and civil rights, and the man for whom I had the good fortune of interning when I was a college student; Paul Simon, whom I just mentioned, my predecessor from Illinois, who was one of the smartest, most decent men I have ever met in any walk of life; and Senator Paul Wellstone of Minnesota, who has received many deserved tributes today. Paul Wellstone was the champion of farmers, hotel maids, grocery clerks, cafeteria workers, and everyone who worked hard and struggled for dignity and enough money just to pay the bills.

Paul Wellstone, as we have heard from both Senator Klobuchar and from Al Franken himself, is the man Al Franken chose to emulate in public life. He stated Paul Wellstone's famous quote: ``We all do better when we all do better.'' It is a simple statement, a profound truth, and it has been the guiding light for Al Franken's Senate career.

Senator Wellstone died 15 years ago in a tragic plane crash. On the 10th anniversary of that terrible loss, Senator Franken wrote an essay about Paul Wellstone's legacy for The Atlantic magazine. I want to read a short section from that essay.

Senator Franken wrote:

One of Paul's most famous quotes is this: ``Politics is not

about power. Politics is not about money. Politics is not

about winning for the sake of winning. Politics is about the

improvement of people's lives.''

That quote is often used to criticize those on the other

side who seem to forget the human consequences of their

political agenda. But progressives should keep it in mind, as

well.

The big fights--war and peace, justice and liberty--are

important. But there aren't any small fights. And where Paul

made the biggest impact--where his work resulted in the

greatest improvement of people's lives--was on issues that

don't usually lead anyone's stump speech: mental health,

domestic violence, homelessness among veterans.

When future historians look back at the legacy of Senator Al Franken, I believe they will say: Here is a man who loved his State and his country, who worked hard to be a good Senator, and who never hesitated to take up an important issue, large or small.

Al Franken and I served together on the Senate Judiciary Committee. Over the years, I have watched him mature into one of the best, most insightful questioners on that committee. His questioning of Supreme Court Nominee Gorsuch, now Supreme Court Justice Gorsuch, helped to expose the Justice's troubling record of ruling against workers and families.

It was a story about a truckdriver who deserted his position on the roadway, was freezing in the middle of the night, who finally got his day in court, and the decision by Judge Gorsuch at the time, in my opinion and Al's opinion, did not serve justice. Many of us raised that issue; no one raised it more effectively than Al Franken.

His probing questioning also exposed Attorney General Sessions for misleading America about his meetings with Russians during the 2016 Presidential campaign.

He has been equally effective on the HELP Committee. His questioning of the future Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos, showed her to be unfamiliar with some of the most basic and important debates in education policy and clearly exposed the fact that she was unready to serve as our Nation's leader at the Department of Education.

I guess some people seek elected office to make a name for themselves, but Al Franken didn't need to be a Senator to achieve that. He already had a well-known name as an entertainer, radio host, and best-selling author before he entered politics. He and his wife Franni have a good life, two great kids, and wonderful grandchildren who followed.

``Terrific'' is the word. Terrific grandchildren who followed.

When it came down to it, Al Franken wanted to do more than just entertain and be well known; he wanted to make a difference in the lives of others. More than anyone, as he said this morning, his wife Franni inspired him. As he explained in his book, her family wasn't as lucky as a lot of us. Her dad died when she was a young baby girl. Her mom raised five kids on Social Security survivor benefits and a paycheck from a local supermarket. But every member of Franni's family

made it to the middle class because of Social Security, Pell grants, the GI bill, and title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

Al writes:

They tell you in this country you have to pull yourself up

by your bootstraps. And we all believe that. But first you've

got to have the boots. And the federal government gave

Franni's family the boots.

``Opportunity is supposed to be for everyone.'' That is one of the articles of faith animating everything that Al Franken has done or sought to achieve in the Senate.

I am going to miss my friend Al Franken, my colleague, and one of my fellow members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. I am sorry he is leaving under these circumstances, but he is going to be remembered, and he is going to have an opportunity to use his voice for others in the future.

Every person who has ever lived has had moments they wish they could erase and words they wish they could take back. In this life of both calm and stormy seas, we all draw strength from the healing power of redemption, and we can take heart in the knowledge that tomorrow is another day with new opportunities to offer a helping hand and make our lives count.

I am happy to hear Al Franken say that while he may be giving up the Senate, he is not giving up his voice in public life. I wish Al Franken, Franni, and their great family the very best and thank them again for what they have given to all of us.

Madam President, I yield.

Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Colorado. We have been engaged in this battle of immigration reform for years. He is a worthy ally, thoughtful, and always thinking of a solution. I thank him for his continuing commitment to this cause.

In the midst of the Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln got so frustrated with General McClellan that he sent him a message. He couldn't get him to attack. He wouldn't do anything.

He asked: General McClellan, if you are not going to use your Army, can I use it? Can I borrow your Army?

So I would like to ask the leaders of the House and Senate: If you are not going to use your Congress, can I borrow it for a minute? Can we fill up this empty Chamber and actually have a real debate over a real bill to solve a real problem?

I think that might be a worthy thing for us to do. In fact, I think that is what we are paid to do; isn't it? Didn't we swear to uphold this Constitution? Didn't we take this historic job on with the goal of making America a better place?

On September 5, President Trump, along with Attorney General Sessions, eliminated the DACA Program. This was a program that gave to almost 800,000 young people--brought to the United States when they were little kids--a chance to go to school, to work, to have futures in this country. They had to go through criminal background checks, turn over all of their information, and pay their taxes--all of the above. Then, for 2 years, they could operate in America. They were not citizens, but they were legally in America. On September 5, President Trump and Attorney General Sessions said: It is over--as of March 5, 2018, no more.

Then the President said: I challenge you, Congress. Do something about it. Pass a law.

That was almost 4 months ago. What have we done in 4 months to address this problem that affects the lives of 800,000 DACA-protected young people? Nothing. We are not using this Congress. General McClellan was not using the Army. Isn't it time that we do something? Wouldn't the American people be so pleasantly surprised if we did something on a bipartisan basis that solved a problem in America?

I know my Republican colleagues are euphoric over their tax bill. Two out of three Americans are not. I am not. I will put it aside for a minute. They spent a lot of time. They passed it. So be it. They did it on a strictly partisan basis. They had a right under the Senate rules to do it that way, and they did it that way. This cannot be done on a strictly partisan basis. You cannot fix the immigration system unless you engage both political parties in the solution.

I am lucky. I care about this. I also found some Republican Senators who care just as much. Jeff Flake of Arizona announced his retirement. I am sorry to see him go because he is a good person of good values. He stepped up and cosponsored the Dream Act that we are talking about here. I didn't even have to call him on the phone. I thanked him, and he said: It is the right thing to do. Lindsey Graham, a Republican of South Carolina, was my cosponsor. Cory Gardner of Colorado and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska stepped up and said: It is the right thing to do for these young people, to give them an opportunity to earn their way into legal status, to earn their way to citizenship.

I thank them for that. We need eight more. If we get 8 more, we will have 12 Republicans out of 52. With eight more, we are ready. We are ready to put 60 votes up when they call the roll. With 60 votes in the Senate, you can get things done.

What has happened? What opportunities have we had in the almost 4 months since the President eliminated this program? None--not one.

Senator McConnell said to Senator Flake when his vote on the tax bill was in doubt: I promise you that we will bring this up in January--this coming January.

I can tell you that I read the promise very closely, and there are a lot of contingencies on there. I hope that Senator McConnell is going to give us our chance early in January to find out if we can come up with a bipartisan solution to this problem.

If you think there aren't other Republicans who support this, 34 Republicans in the House of Representatives sent a letter to Speaker Paul Ryan and wrote: Pass the Dreamer legislation this year--34 Republicans. So we are not alone. They are not the only ones.

Yesterday, 11 Governors--11 of them, Republicans and Democrats--sent a letter to Congress, calling on us to do this. The letter was signed by the Democratic Governors from Minnesota, Montana, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina and by the Republican Governors from Nevada, Massachusetts, Vermont, and Utah, and by Alaska's Independent Governor.

We are hearing from those in the business community. They want this done. They have seen these Dreamers. They have seen these young people. They believe in them, and they want us to do something to help them. We have heard it from the labor organizations, and we have heard it from the faith organizations.

Across the board, 76 percent of the American people support what we are trying to do here--76 percent. What issues get 76 percent? The flag? I will bet you it gets even more, but not many others get 76 percent approval, including 61 percent of the Trump voters. They think it is the right thing to do. Do you know why? Because many of these people have met the Dreamers. When you come to know them and hear their stories, you come to the conclusion--at least I do--that, for goodness' sake, these are extraordinary young people. Somehow or another, they have survived and have even flourished in a country that doesn't recognize them as legal. They went to our schools. They pledged allegiance to our flag. They sang the national anthem. That is the country they know.

Let me tell you about one before I turn the floor over to my colleague from Maryland. This young lady's name is Miriam Gonzalez. She is the 105th Dreamer whose story I have told on the floor.

When she was 6 years old, her family brought her to the United States from Mexico, and she grew up near Los Angeles. She was a good student and a good athlete. In high school she played softball and golf. She was a member of the bible club, the chemistry club, and the reading club. She was an active volunteer in her community, including assistant teaching at the local elementary school. She was the valedictorian of her high school class. She was accepted at UCLA. She majored in anthropology and minored in classical civilization.

Let me give a postscript here. If you are undocumented and go to college in America, you get no Federal assistance--no Pell grant, no Federal loan. You have to earn the money. You have to work jobs to do it. She did. She held down the necessary jobs and commuted to school from her parents' home by taking public transportation for 2 hours each way on every schoolday.

She was involved in student groups, mentored students at Van Nuys High School, and encouraged them to go to college. She continued to excel academically. She made the dean's honor roll and was awarded a certificate for her research at UCLA. Today, she is assisting students in low-income neighborhoods and schools.

After graduation, she went to work with Teach For America. Do you know what that means? It means taking a job that pays hardly anything to teach in one of the most challenging schools in America. She did it. She taught seventh- and eighth-grade students in L.A. She teaches five classes for students who are having trouble with math and reading, and she gives one-on-one tutoring.

She is involved in the school's parents committee and tries to get the parents of these kids who need their helping hands to excel as well. She is a full-time graduate student at Loyola Marymount University, where she is pursuing a master's degree in education.

I am going to read her letter and then turn over the floor.

Every day for [my] first two months [as a teacher] my

students would ask me if I would be returning the next day,

week, and month, and I would reassure them that I was there

to stay. Eventually, they began to trust me and believe that

I was there to support them. . . . Now students believe that

I am there for them and truly care about helping and

preparing [them] to succeed academically. My students have

made huge improvements academically, [and] I am particularly

proud of how hard they all work. After hearing about the fate

of DACA--

She is talking about President Trump abolishing DACA--

my students were worried that they would be losing me. I

continue to reassure them that I am not going anywhere

anytime soon and will fight to be able to see them finish

middle school.

What is going to happen to her if we don't do what we are supposed to do--if we don't use this Senate and that House to solve this problem? What is going to happen to her and her students? Are we so busy? Do you notice it on the floor? Are we so busy that we

can't take up a piece of legislation here, debate it, and pass it today?

Before the end of the day, we are going to pass a measure to keep the government open and functioning for about 3 or 4 weeks. It is something that may pass the House. We will find out later this afternoon. I am troubled by it. It doesn't have one word in it to deal with this challenge, and we have known for 4 months that it was coming and that we had to do it.

I am going to be voting no on that, and it is not because of the merits of the continuing resolution. Until we address this issue and take the time to use the Senate and use the House to solve this problem, I am not going to be standing here and saying: I am going home for Christmas. I don't know what is going to happen to Miriam. I don't know what is going to happen to 800,000 others--get back to you later. The time is now for us to solve this problem.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I would like to take a moment to acknowledge an extraordinary woman from my home State of Illinois.

Heather Gooze lives in Nevada now, but she grew up in the Chicago area. She is a survivor of the worst mass shooting in modern American history. On October 1, she was working as a bartender at the Route 91 Harvest Festival in Las Vegas. She was there when a gunman with his own private arsenal rained down gunfire from a high-rise hotel, murdering 58 innocent people and injuring more than 500 others.

Ms. Gooze testified at a recent Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on ``bump stocks,'' the $200 accessory that the Las Vegas gunman used to make his assault rifles fire almost as fast as a machine gun.

When she heard the first round of shots, Heather thought it might have been fireworks, but suddenly people were running in every direction. Some were shot; many were covered in blood.

Heather directed wounded and frightened people to an exit. With about 20 other people, she then pushed down a fence to make it easier for people to escape the gunfire.

She could have run to safety herself. Instead, she went back to the bar to try to help people who had been shot and lay wounded on the ground.

One young man had been shot in the head. Heather held a jean jacket to his wound to try to staunch the bleeding. When she dropped the jacket, she used her fingers to try to plug the hole in the young man's head. He died the next day.

She then saw three men trying to move another badly injured man using a metal ladder as a stretcher. Heather reached out to grab a corner of the ladder and help lift it. The young man on the ladder grabbed her hand, squeezed it lightly, and then let go--dead.

Heather looked around, saw other dead bodies lying alone, and decided that she would not leave that young man alone like that.

She stayed with his body for hours, until 3:30 in the morning.

When his cell phone rang, she answered. She told the young man's mother that her only child had died. The young man's girlfriend had escaped the killing field to the safety of a nearby hotel. Heather told her that young woman that the love of her life was gone, but Heather would stay with him and learn for the family where his body would be taken.

At the recent hearing, Heather said that horrific night in Las Vegas made her part of a growing, grieving ``family'' she had hoped never to join: the American family of survivors and victims of mass shootings.

She said that she has asked herself many times in the days after the shooting why she stayed and risked her life for young men she didn't know and for their grieving families. She said the only answer she could come up with was that she hoped that someone would do the same for her and not leave her alone in the midst of a massacre.

I think that is the same plea that many Americans have for this Congress. They understand that gun safety is a politically heated issue. They understand that there are constitutional and legal questions that are difficult to balance.

They want us to have the courage to take up that debate rationally, responsibly and respectfully.

On an average day, 93 Americans are killed with guns--93 people a day, every day. Over 30,000 Americans a year die from guns. Many more live in daily fear that they could be next.

I hope that we can agree to be more like Heather Gooze, to not abandon our fellow Americans to face that danger and fear of gun violence alone. Supporting Senator Feinstein's bill to ban the sale of ``bump stocks'' would be a good place to start.