Floor Statements

I announce that the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Brown), the Senator from Louisiana (Ms. Landrieu), and the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Rockefeller) are necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from Louisiana (Ms. Landrieu), and the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Rockefeller) are necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from Louisiana (Ms. Landrieu) and the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Rockefeller) are necessarily absent.

I yield back all time.

I announce that the Senator from Louisiana (Ms. Landrieu), the Senator from Michigan (Mr. Levin), and the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Rockefeller) are necessarily absent.

I announce the Senator from Louisiana (Mrs. Landrieu) and the Senator from Missouri (Mrs. McCaskill) are necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from Louisiana (Ms. Landrieu) is necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from Alaska (Mr. Begich) and the Senator from Louisiana (Ms. Landrieu) are necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from Louisiana (Ms. Landrieu) is necessarily absent.

Mr. President, Chicago lost its Candy Man on Thanksgiving Day. Salvatore Ferrara II passed away in Oak Brook, IL. He was the third generation of the Ferrara family who has given us memories, cavities, and the treats that lit up kids for generations.

Simply listing their iconic candies takes you back in time: Original Boston Baked Beans at the Saturday movies, Red Hots after a sandlot game, Lemonheads at the swimming pool, and Atomic Fireballs on a dare. A handful of Ferrara candy was like a handful of happiness.

Ferrara Pan Candy Company was started in 1908 in Chicago by Mr. Ferrara's grandfather, the original Salvatore Ferraro. Its first candy was

confetti, the candy-coated almonds served at Italian weddings, symbolizing good luck. Nello Ferrara followed his dad into the business.

It was Nello who invented the company's lip-puckering Lemonhead candies. Little Sal was born with forceps, giving him a temporarily misshapen head--``like a lemon,'' his dad said. And candy history was made.

Nello Salvatore's military service in Japan after World War II provided the inspiration for another company classic--Atomic Fireballs.

Sal II joined the family business in the mid seventies. Over the next 40 years, the company would grow from 35 to more than 500 workers, and annual revenues soared from $3.5 million to $300 million. It also acquired another iconic candy: Gummy Bears.

Sal Ferrara died of esophageal cancer. His family said he hadn't smoked since 1981. His doctor reportedly linked his cancer to acid reflux disease. He was too young--just 63 years old.

I want to offer my condolences to Mr. Ferrara's friends and family, especially his wife Andrea, his children Alana, Lauren, Nello II, and Erik, and his three grandchildren.

I join kids and former kids all over America in thanking Sal Ferrara and his family for so many sweet treats and happy memories.

I announce that the Senator from Louisiana (Ms. Landrieu), the Senator from Maryland (Ms. Mikulski), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), the Senator from Michigan (Ms. Stabenow), and the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. Whitehouse) are necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from Louisiana (Ms. Landrieu), the Senator from Maryland (Ms. Mikulski), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), the Senator from Michigan (Ms. Stabenow), and the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. Whitehouse) are necessarily absent.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak in morning business.

Mr. President, it has been 511 days since the Senate passed bipartisan legislation to reform our broken immigration system. Fourteen Republicans joined the Democrats in supporting a measure which covered what I believe are the major challenges facing America when it comes to immigration in the 21st century.

There was an amendment adopted by Senator Corker, and I believe Senator Hoeven cosponsored it. Their amendment would have strengthened our border security to unprecedented levels.

At this moment in time, we have more Federal law enforcement officials on the border between the United States and Mexico than the combined population of all other Federal law enforcement agencies. It is a massive commitment which would have been enhanced even more by the comprehensive immigration reform bill.

For those border State Senators, we would have reached the point where--from Galveston to San Diego--we would have literally had available a law enforcement agent every half mile 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. It is a massive investment, and it passed the Senate 511 days ago.

That same bill addressed some serious issues about agriculture workers in Illinois, California, Texas, and all across the Nation. Growers are telling us they are having a difficult time bringing in the workers who will do the backbreaking, hard, physical labor necessary for agriculture. This bill addressed it. In fact, the bill was endorsed by both growers as well as those who do the work. It was an amazing political achievement.

It also addressed the issue of H-1Bs. Why in the world do we bring the best and brightest from around the world to the United States for advanced degrees, advanced education and then welcome them to leave? If they stayed and worked to create jobs and new businesses and new innovations in America, we could build our economy. The bill addressed it.

As important as all of those issues are, the bill addressed 11 million undocumented people in America--11 million, and that is just an estimate. The bill said those who were here undocumented--who had been here for several years--could step up, register with the government, pay their filing fee, submit themselves to a background check, pay their taxes, and then be reviewed annually for years to make sure they were still complying with the laws of the United States.

They would not qualify for government benefits or programs during this period of time, but they could work their way to legal status. That bill passed the Senate on a bipartisan basis with 68 votes. The bill then went over to the House of Representatives where, sadly, it languished. Nothing happened.

The Speaker of the House refused to call the bill up for a vote. In fact, he refused to call any aspect of the bill up for a vote. He refused to call it in committee for any consideration or debate, and then he let it languish. There were times when the House Republican leadership tempted the White House and others by saying: Well, maybe now we can call it up for a vote. They never, ever did. We have waited 511 days, and here we are today.

This evening, President Obama is going to announce an Executive order to address immigration. He has waited patiently, and America has waited patiently for the Republicans in the House of Representatives to step forward and accept this responsibility, but they have refused. They have refused to fix this broken immigration system, and you can bet as soon as the President issues his Executive order, there will be a chorus of complaints that this President has gone too far by using his Executive authority to address this issue.

You won't hear the facts from the critics. You won't hear from the critics that every President since Dwight

David Eisenhower--I believe 11 different Democrats and Republicans-- have issued Executive orders relating to immigration. President George Herbert Walker Bush basically said--by Executive order--that we are not going to prosecute 1.5 million undocumented immigrants in America. He used his prosecutorial discretion. That is the kind of thing which we have come to expect from Presidents, and we expect Congress to complain about it. That has continued.

Here is what we believe President Obama will announce today. The details are just starting to emerge in press reports. He is going to announce that we are going to push for accountability in immigration. Senator Marco Rubio was on the bipartisan panel that put together the comprehensive immigration reform bill. He said something that was very pressing, and I wish to refer to it at this moment. He said for those who criticize amnesty, doing nothing is amnesty for those who are here in the United States and undocumented. Doing nothing is amnesty.

What President Obama is going to suggest--instead of amnesty--is accountability. Here is what he will say. Those who have children who are American citizens and have been here at least 5 years will have a chance to step forward and register with the government, pay the filing fee for processing, submit themselves to a criminal background check, and pay their taxes.

The President says, if you will do that--under his order--it is my understanding it will say you can legally work in America. They will not become a citizen nor will they have legal status beyond the work permit, but they don't have to fear deportation. They are down the list and are not considered a dangerous person who should be deported.

The highest priority for those who will be deported are those with criminal records, and they should be deported. There is no room in the United States for anyone--let alone undocumented--who come here and commit a crime.

Secondly, if you have repeat offenders and those who violated the legal system, they will be in the second category.

The third category of those who meet the criteria I mentioned will be given their chance.

This is about accountability. This really says to those who wish to say: If you will play by these rules, we will give you a chance to stay and work.

What is the reason? We want to deport felons; we don't want to deport families. We want to deport criminals; we don't want to deport children. We will focus our efforts on the borders on those who are trying to come across and those who are here and should leave. That means more resources would be put into enforcement, and it also means that those who are here will be registered. We will know who they are, where they are, where they are working, and we will know that they are paying their taxes to stay in this country.

The alternative from the Republican point of view--for 511 days--is to do nothing. That is an unacceptable alternative.

There is a better alternative to an Executive order, and the President will be the first to say it, and that is that this Congress-- on a bipartisan basis--rolls up its sleeves and tackles this issue. We should. That is why we were elected. To do nothing, as the House has done for 511 days, is unacceptable. To stand by the sidelines and criticize this President for using his Executive authority--the same Executive authority used over and over again by Presidents of both political parties in the field of immigration--is not constructive.

There is one other thing that is even worse. Some Members of the other party are suggesting they are prepared to shut down the Government of the United States over this issue. If the President uses his legal authority, they have threatened to shut down the Government of the United States.

We saw that last year when the junior Senator from Texas took the floor and said he was going to close down the government over the issue of the Affordable Care Act. It was a terrible strategy. A lot of innocent people were hurt. It cost our government and our economy dearly. It was a politically desperate act which I hope will not be repeated ever again--certainly not when it comes to the issue of immigration.

If there was ever a time for us to stand together--both political parties--and solve a problem, this is it. Standing on the sidelines and complaining--which is what we have heard over and over again from the House Republican leadership and continue to hear when it comes to the President's Executive order--is not the kind of constructive policy the American people need.

I applaud the President. He is going to take a lot of grief for this--for using his Executive power--but thank goodness he is stepping up and addressing the problem. Where others have walked away from it, ignored it, and come up with every excuse on Earth, he is directly addressing the problem. And now it is time for us in the Congress to do the same thing.

We are going to come back after Thanksgiving and will be here for at least 10 days. Speaker Boehner, leader of the Republican House, has the authority to instantly call to the floor of the House this bipartisan immigration bill which passed the Senate. There is no excuse. If he is going to criticize the President for using his power to solve a problem, then the Speaker should use his power to address that same problem. Call the comprehensive immigration reform bill before we leave at the end of this year. Bring it up for a vote in the House. I think it will pass.

If it passes, and we do--by legislation--a much broader review and change in the immigration reform bill, we will have done what we were elected to do. We will have served this Nation, and we will have set out to repair this broken immigration system.

I yield the floor.

I announce that the Senator from North Carolina (Mrs. Hagan), the Senator from Louisiana (Ms. Landrieu), and the Senator from Michigan (Mr. Levin) are necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from North Carolina (Mrs. Hagan) and the Senator from Louisiana (Ms. Landrieu) are necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from North Carolina (Mrs. Hagan) and the Senator from Louisiana (Ms. Landrieu) are necessarily absent.

Mr. President, it is not very often that Congress can make a policy change that has life-or-death consequences for millions of people, but in 2010 a law was enacted that is changing the money supply for warlords in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Many may not realize that almost 5.5 million people have been killed during the long-running conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo, which has been the most deadly since World War II. Tragically, women and children have suffered the most, as we too often see in conflicts. Millions have been displaced from their homes, and the prevalence of rape and sexual violence as a weapon of war is almost beyond belief. The U.N. reports that about 1,000 women are assaulted every day in Congo, which is roughly equivalent to 12 percent of all Congolese women.

One of the drivers and funders of this conflict is paradoxically that which fills the DRC with such potential--its natural resources. Instead of paying for the nation's peace, education, roads and public health programs, the DRC's mineral wealth has been siphoned off to fund the armed groups that vie for local and regional control of vast areas far from Congo's capital, Kinshasa.

Tin, tantalum, tungsten, and gold are found in everyday electronics, jewelry, airplanes, and manufacturing equipment. But these minerals also have provided weapons and salaries to fighters, including conscripted child soldiers, who then visit unspeakable horrors on innocent civilians in return.

Over 4 years ago, I joined former Senators Brownback and Feingold and Congressman Jim McDermott in drafting a simple transparency reporting requirement for U.S.-registered corporations that source these four minerals from the DRC or its neighbors. And in early June, after protracted legal challenges, the first of those annual reports was filed at the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The electronics industry, in general, has been out front on this push for great transparency, but sadly, the jewelry industry has lagged far behind on its due diligence and reporting. Some companies have made more than a good-faith effort to determine the origins of the minerals they and their suppliers use, and a few of those companies, I am proud to say, call Illinois home.

One of the leaders, across all industries, on this is Motorola Solutions, headquartered in Schaumbergn, IL. Motorola Solutions emerged early as a company dedicated to cleaning up its supply chain, and to do so, it helped establish Solutions for Hope, dedicated to developing a closed-pipe supply chain. Kester, a subsidiary of Illinois Tool Works, makes electronic and automobile components and has been a leader in transparency of the smelters it uses. John Deere, headquartered in Moline, IL, painstakingly described its due diligence processes and even detailed the sources of minerals that its suppliers used. Others, like AAR Corporation, based out of Wood Dale, and Dover Corporation, headquartered in Downers Grove, developed conflict-mineral specific compliancy programs and provided detailed information on steps to identify risks in their supply chains. Lake Forest's IDEX Corporation underwent efforts to create a sourcing policy that in its first year of filing covered 90 percent of suppliers.

I am sorry to say not all companies took this reporting requirement seriously, hiding behind the 2-year grace period that allows them to avoid questions. My hope is that these Illinois companies serve as an example for next year's filings nationwide. And here is why--this rule is yielding real, tangible, positive results already.

The Government Accountability Office issued a report in late June that confirmed the opposite of claims made by those seeking to dismantle this reporting requirement. This rule has expanded the options for clean minerals sourcing in Central Africa. In fact, the number of certified conflict-free smelters has more than tripled in the past year alone. Intel has created its first conflict-free computer chip, while using responsibly sourced minerals from Congo and took its reporting a step further by voluntarily submitting it to third-party audits. Under the Conflict-Free Smelter Program, the number of international smelters operating free from conflict minerals continues to grow. Almost 90 smelters (40 percent of the world's total smelters) are certified as conflict-free and more than 150 companies and industry associations participate in the program.

After being refined the origins of the material become difficult to track. Smelters purchase materials from a variety of sources, so the smelter or refiner is a critical point in the supply chain, where we can look for assurances about whether the material has been purchased from conflict-free sources. Apple has confirmed that its entire tantalum supply chain is conflict free. Dutch smart phone manufacturer Fairphone is making its products with conflict-free raw materials. Fairphone has already sold 35,000 units and is hoping to expand production as more consumers embrace conflict-free electronics. Fairphone and others are leading by example and proving that conflict- free is not only possible but that it can be profitable too.

The Enough Project recently reported on the effect of this legislation, and it is good news. Armed groups and the Congolese army are no longer present at 2/3 of tin, tantalum, and tungsten mines surveyed in eastern Congo. It also appears that responsible sourcing initiatives might be contagious--Congo-Brazzaville, the DRC's neighbor to the west, has begun its own program to determine clean sources of minerals as well. I am also happy to say that our counterparts in the European Union are reviewing a bill based on our law to require European companies to provide similar transparency in their own supply chains. China has instituted similar rules, and other nations are following close behind.

The Congress has emerged as a world leader on conflict-minerals reporting, and the early results suggest that the people of the DRC should not have to suffer unspeakable violence that can be traced back to our cell phones, wedding rings, and cars. The filings are far from perfect, but we have begun the process. I appreciate those industry players that are leading the way. I can only hope that by cutting off this rich source of funding for the fighting in the Congo, we can help spare its citizens from the senseless violence that is tearing the country apart.