it's baloney. i have no faith in our congress. >> host: randy, got your point. let me give the congressman a chance to respond. >> guest: when donald trump was president, had a republican majority in the house and in the senate. he did nothing about the border, right? if this isen an issue i think people have politically used rather than actually solve for way, way too long. secondly, when joe biden has asked for resources so that he can process people quicker at the border so that some people will be returned quicker if they don't belong here, congress won't give us the money. they want to be a lingering problem going into november. and it is congress' obligation, ultimately, tono change the law. there's a republican member of congress, chip roy, from texas on the floor yesterday saying millionste of people came in across the border when donald trump was president. look, this has happened under democrats and republicans. we need to do something in a bipartisan way. the senate attempted to. republican republicans threw that idea way. i think people are going to have to weigh that decisionte going into november. >> host: lake geneva, wisconsin,

john.ev an independent. good morning. >> caller: good morning, representative. the democrats were in charge, i believe, the first two years of this current administration, so i'd just like to say -- >> we are going to leave this here to take you live now to the floor of the u.s. senate where today lawmakers are set to vote on a bipartisan bill that would provide border security funding as well as a aid for israel and ukraine. the measure needs 60 votes to proceed. a number of republicans have already voiced their opposition to the legislation. live coverage of the senate here on c-span2. the chaplain, dr. barry black, the chaplain, dr. barry black, r

>> .. that. but all week long senate republicans have looked more and more like their house counterparts and transformed themselves into the chaos caucus. republicans have said they can't pass ukraine without border. now they say they can't pass ukraine with border. so today i'm giving them a choice. they can show america where they stand and what they stand for.

which way will it be? today i have laid out both options for republicans to do the right thing. democrats certainly want to fix the border. it is extremely important, and we have shown our willingness time and time again to take big steps to secure the border. but we will move forward today with either option. first, i have scheduled a vote on the supplemental that includes strong bipartisan border reforms that republicans have demanded for months. negotiators on both sides worked themselves to the bone putting this border package together. i was heavily involved. i saw the work, the blood, the sweat, the tears that went into it. why did we do it? because that's what republicans wanted. they said can't do ukraine, can't do israel, can't do humanitarian aid without border. i made sure negotiators had enough time to do their work.

i gave them the space to keep going, even when it seemed like a deal was out of reach. because, again, democrats want to secure the border because it's extremely important, it is urgent, it can't wait. we must act, and we are ready to move forward on this bill now. today when we vote, it will be clear as day who is serious about fixing the border and who is not. i urge republicans to take yes for an answer. now, if republicans block this national security package with border legislation that they dem demanded, later today i will give them the opportunity to move forward with a package without border reforms. this package will otherwise be largely the same. it will have strong funding for ukraine, funding for israel, help for innocent civilians in gaza, and funding to the

indo-pacific. the legislation on the floor today is one of the most important security packages the senate has considered there a very long time. so the onus is on senate republicans to finally take yes for an answer. it would be an embarrassment for our country, an absolute nightmare for the republican party, if they reject national security funding twice in one day. today is the day for republicans to do the right thing when it comes to our national security. now, mr. president, it must be -- a senator: mr. president, would my friend from new york yield. the presiding officer: no, i will not. a senator: just for a question about -- mr. schumer: not now, i'm in the middle of my speech. mr. president, it must be said that the 180-degree turn republicans have done on border is the most stunning thing i've

seen congress in a long, long time do. the damage done by republicans to their credibility cannot be understated. after all, how many times have we heard our republican colleagues give speeches here on the floor about the emergency at the border? how many times have we heard republicans say year after year that congress must act? the legislation, that legislation is the only long-term solution. they've said that, legislation is the way we have to go. how many times have we seen republicans take field trips down to the border, like eagle pass or laredo, and take pictures with the fence towering behind them, while bemoaning that the problem at the border is only getting worse? well, apparently, that was all for show, apparently republicans aren't actually serious about fixing the border, because you cannot, you cannot claim to be serious about fixing the border while voting against the kind of

border package we have before us today. you cannot claim to truly care about fixing asylum if you're going to vote against the biggest updates to asylum law in decades. you cannot claim to care about our border patrol agents while depriving them of the very tools and funding they're asking for. remember, the union of border patrol agents, a very conservative, almost always pro-republican group, wants us to pass this bill. why are we doing all of this? why are they going to kill, in one fell swoop, this agreement that has taken months to piece together? the own, why have republicans backed off on border when they know it's the right thing to do? two words -- donald trump. donald trump doesn't like that the senate finally reached a real partisan border deal, a real bipartisan border deal, so

he has demanded republicans kill it. let me say that again, because it's plain as -- it's as plain as could be. donald trump doesn't like that the senate finally reached a bipartisan border deal, so he has demanded republicans kill it. he thinks it's far better to keep the border in chaos so he can exploit it for personal political gains. and senate republicans, vertebrae nowhere to be found, are ready to blunder away our best chance at fixing the border in order to elevate what they see as the interests of donald trump above the interests of the country. i expected the kind of -- this kind of cynical nonsense from the far-right house maga republicans. but it is shameful and embarrassing to see maga radicalism take hold here in the senate. no matter how today shakes out, i hope republicans end up doing the right thing when it comes to national security before the day

is done, and agree to move forward on those things they do support. because, mr. president, if there's one other person besides donald trump who is rooting for chaos in the senate, it is vladimir putin. if we fail in this moment, if we abandon our friends in ukraine to vladimir putin, history will cast a shameful and permanent shadow on senators who block funding. it is a matter of the highest national urgency that we get this right. remember what putin said two months ago about american aid to ukraine, quote, the free stuff is going to run out someday, and it seems it already has, unquote. that, mr. president, is vladimir putin taunting the senate, dementing america -- taunting america. we have a chance today to make him regret those words. republicans of decades past would have never hesitated to support funding for nations like ukraine. in previous generations, both

parties would have bent heaven and earth to stand up to russian dictators. i can hear ronald reagan giving a speech, passionately asking the senate to vote for aid to ukraine. we spent half a century safeguarding the free world against the malicious spread of communism, against tyranny, against those who have tried to undermine our values. those very same issues of western democracy, of the sovereignty of free nations, of the safety of our troops, our citizens, are on the line yet again in the 21st century. they are the very things that stitch this supplemental together. it is why we are here with this bill before us in the first place. there is only one right answer for the senate today to address the great challenges we face. there is only one path forward to fulfill our obligations to the american people. there is only one way senators,

democrats and republicans, both sides of the aisle, should vote today, and that is for us to move forward on the package of national security. i yield the floor. mr. wicker: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from mississippi. mr. wicker: i wonder if the majority leader would yield for a question on schedule. may i say on just this quick point, mr. president? my question to the democratic leader was about the way he intends to proceed. obviously, he has counted the votes, as we have on this side, and the package with the border provision will not pass. then he intends to move to a package that does not contain the border provision. my question to the distinguished leader would have been does he intend to negotiate an amendment process where members from both

sides of the aisle would be able to propose changes in the legis legislation, and how will that affect when we go forward and when we're able to deal with these important issues that he has advocated for so vigorously. those would have been my questions, and i think the american people and the senate deserve an answer on how we're going to proceed, and will there be an open process of amendments. thank you, mr. president. mr. cornyn: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: mr. president, i think it's, after listening to the majority leader's comments, i think it's worth taking five minutes to recall how we got h here. you know, it's ironic to me that people give speeches here on the floor of the senate about their support for israel, and there's

no doubt israel is involved in an existential fight with iran proxies like hamas, hezbollah, the houthi rebels, the shi'ia militias in syria and iraq. but the house passed an israel aid package on november 2. israel was attacked october 7. the house acted on november 2, and the majority leader, who's the only one who can schedule a vote on anything here on the senate floor, has done nothing to help our best ally and friend in the middle east, the state of israel. nothing. and he's insisted that we package together aid to ukraine, aid to the indo-pacific, and there's been endless discussions

about a border bill, which i'll come to in a moment. but this problem we're running into is one of his own creation. he could decide to take up these bills individually, knowing that the house has already passed an israel aid bill, and then have the senate take it up and pass that bill, and then we can turn to the other issues that are vitally important to our national security and deserve fulsome debate and an open amendment process. that's the question my friend from mississippi was trying to ask the majority leader, but he decided to leave the floor without responding to that. giving me some doubt as to the sincerity of his commitment to have an open amendment process and actually restore the senate to its previously held reputation as the world's

greatest deliberative body. nobody can call us that now, with a straight face. and i understand that the majority leader is trying the best he can to help the republican party. he gives advice freely as to what republicans should do. but the fact of the matter is we have no confidence, zero confidence, that the biden administration will enforce the law when it comes to the border. that's been the case for the last three years, resulting in historically high numbers, 300,000 people a month showing up at the border, only to be ushered into the interior by biden open border policies, that either people claim asylum and are released into the interior, perhaps never to be heard from

again, or they're released on parole. catch and release is the policy of the biden administration and congressional democrats. that has proven to be a powerful magnet for illegal immigration. people literally coming from all around the world, because they know they can make it into the country, because president biden and senate democrats have laid out the welcome mat. so you'll have to forgive me when i note the fake outrage, the phony messaging that we hear from democrats about this border negot negotiation. yes, it's true that we hope to come up with something credible, and on our side of the aisle senator lankford from oklahoma has done a heroic and a thankless job of trying to come up with a negotiated package.

but the fact of the matter is the package includes catch and release, still, providing additional -- or continuing incentives for people to come to the country illegally, knowing they'll be released into the interior, and it does nothing to stop the biden administration from abusing something called parole, which that means in order to avoid bad press, in order to avoid embarrassing tv pictures of an overwhelmed border, they simply just release people into the interior of the country for two years and give them a work permit. are you kidding me? they now claim to be the defenders of the border and for border security? what a joke. what a joke. and it's a bad joke. we know as a result of biden

border policies, supported day in and day out by our democratic colleagues for the entire time that president biden has been in office, have resulted in roughly seven million migrants being released into the interior of the united states and 1.7 million gotaways, is what the border patrol calls them, people evading law enforcement for good reason, i suspect, either they're transporting illegal drugs into the interior of the united states or maybe, just maybe, out of that 1.7 million there's a few people who are on the terrorist watch list. we know the border patrol has detained 170, at least that he the last count. but they can't tell us how many more people on the terrorist watch list are among those got-aways, endangering the safety and security of the united states. it took 19 people to kill 3,000

americans on 9/11. what about 1.7 million got-aways? we don't know whether these are serial criminals? we don't know whether they're transporting drugs? had we don't know -- we don't know whether they're -- and neither do our senate colleagues who do nothing, nada to deal with this problem. so you'll have to forgive me if i find their fake outrage unconvincing. and then of the 108,000 americans who died of drug overdoses last year -- that's also part of the biden open border policy. i wear -- have been wearing since april of last year a rubber bracelet given to me by

the father of a young woman who lost her life because she took a pill that she thought was relatively innocuous but it was laced with fentanyl. her name was sienna. her father asked me to wear this bracelet. it says, one pill can kill. well, 70,000 people died of fentanyl poisoning last year, who took something they thought was relatively innocuous laced with fentanyl and not waking up the next morning. and then perhaps the greatest untold story -- we tried to tell the story. "the new york times" has written about this, is the hundreds of thousands of unaccompanied children who have been placed with sponsors in the interior of the united states who've come across the border.

they've been attracted like a magnet to our border. and under biden policies they've been released to sponsors, many of whom aren't even immediate relatives. and the biden administration has simply lost track of them. they can't tell you whether the 300,000 children are going to school, whether they're getting the health care they need, whether they're being trafficked for sex, whether they're being forced into involuntary labor. "the new york times" has written at least two times that i recall about forced labor conditions for these migrant children. forced into illegal, dangerous labor. and "the new york times" tried to call some of these sponsors to see if they could -- they knew about what these children

were doing, these children who were turned over to the care of these sponsors by the biden administration under their current policies. and 85,000 -- in 85,000 cases, 85,000 cases there was no answer. so the truth is, under the biden border policies, under the policies supported by all of our democratic colleagues now who are demonstrating fake outrage about the failure of the current border bill, they simply did a care. they don't care about these children. they don't care about the families grieving lost ones as a result of the illegal drugs that stream across the border, carried by the very criminal organizations that smuggle people from around the world who show up at our border and are

released into the interior of the united states. what greater incentive can you think of for attracting illegal immigration? than the open border policies which tragically result in the death of innocent americans, including innocent children, and losing 300,000 children placed with sponsors? the biden administration doesn't care. so let me just say that when the majority leader takes off his hat, as the majority leader of this great institution, and puts on his hat as a democratic partisan making political attacks against the very people

who he's hoping will support the legislation that he's advocating for -- aid to ukraine -- this is not a good day for this institution. and it strikes me as bizarre -- as a bizarre tactic when you know who the hundred people are that are going to be voting ones legislation that he's going to be putting on the floor. and the fact that the majority leader walks away from a legitimate question from our colleague, the senator from mississippi, that asks whether there will be an opportunity for debate and votes on amendments, he won't even answer the question. this is the same majority leader that put this bill on the floor that we'll be voting on at 1:00 and said, okay, we released the text on sunday night and in 72

hours senators are going to have to vote on it. these are detailed, complex negotiations that have been taking place for months now, and the majority leader won't even give the senate and senators time to digest it and understand it? i think that tells you all you need to know about his motives. this is all about partisan political attacks and posturing leading up to the november 2024 election. president biden is guilty of some of the same posturing. he said -- this is rich. after secretary mayorkas, the secretary of homeland security, has said time and time again under oath, the border is secure, well, we knew that was a lie because our eyes did not deceive us. we could see what was happening

at the border. we could listen to mayor adams in new york city, the mayor of chicago, governors around the country saying, we're being inundated by migrants coming across the border, and it's going to -- in the case of mayor adams, he said, it's going to destroy new york city, even though they are a self-designated sanctuary city. well, all of that has fallen on deaf ears for the last three years, and the senate majority leader and the president of the united states think that the american people are so dumb that they haven't seen what's been going on the last three years. they have resisted every single effort on our part to secure the border. to halt this tsunami of illegal

immigration and illegal drugs. they have resisted all of it. and now the majority leader would have you believe that he's had a conversion. this is saul on the road to damascus. but i don't believe it, and i don't believe the american people will believe it. because they're common sense, their very eyes and ears tell them something different, and that is that the biden administration, democrats in the senate and the senate majority leader who came out here crying crocodile tears over the failure of the border negotiation, they know it's not true.

the american people will not be deceived by this transparent political pitch suggesting that now they are the champions of border security. the president of the united states has every tool he needs, every tool he needs to secure the border. the laws that are in effect now were the same laws that were in effect when president trump was in office, and the numbers were dramatically different. in fact, president biden's numbers of people coming across the border have exceeded the number that came during the entire eight years of the obama administration and the entire four years of the trump administration. so, mr. president, i know there are others here, including my friend, the republican leader, hot are prepared to speak, so i'll sit down. but i just couldn't help myself, sitting here listening to what

the majority leader was trying to sell, which was so patently ahistorical -- false -- and is clearly just partisan political rhetoric trying to improve what the a very, very damaged reputation when it comes to dealing with our national security and the border. mr. mcconnell: mr. president. the presiding officer: the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: four months ago, senate republicans asked our colleague from oklahoma, senator lankford, to take on a pretty tall order -- negotiate serious border security policy with an administration that had shown no interest in actually securing the border. he put in an enormous amount of work, and i'm very grateful for

the persistence he's shown over many nights, weekends, and a few holidays. the product he was able to secure earned the endorsement of the national border patrol council, a sign that you're pointing in the right direction. but as our colleagues recognized, the agreement does not have a a path to become law. the border crisis that president biden invited through his rhetoric and his willful neglect will continue to challenge the brave men and women of cbp and ice and impact communities across the country. and its effects will follow his legacy forever. i wish i croix say that -- i wish i could say that a record-setting border crisis was the only challenge that the president's failures have laid before us, but our completion know as wellings -- but our colleagues know as well as i do

that that isn't the case. there have always been aggressive forces seeking to harm america and to challenge our interests. the very existence of the western order in which sovereign nations choose their own leaders has always been an affront to repressive and aggressive regimes around the world. but even in the face of serious threats for large portions of modern history, the united states has dictated the terms of engagement. for decades, the world's foremost superpower has been the one doing the deterring. not anymore. it's no longer a settled question that america will meet aggression with overwhelming force or even that we'll back our allies 100%. take this headline about president biden's response to the attack that killed three u.s. soldiers last month. quote, u.s. strikes steer clear

of iran's red lines, end quote. here's the subhead of another one -- quote, u.s. officials acknowledge that the targeted militias still retain the majority of their capability to carry out future attacks. end quote. oh, here's one more. pentagon says it's not planning for a long-term campaign against iran's proxies in iraq and syria. so, mr. president, what can the american people and the entire world gather about the biden administration's approach to the threats that we face? first, we know that iran is deterring america, not the other way around. second, we knee that the commander in chief -- we know that the commander in chief has not yet directed the strongest military in the world even to exercise sufficient force

against expendable proxy terrorists, let alone the iranian sponsors. finally, we know that the biden administration lashes r lacks resolve. the pentagon conceded this week they are not aware a single irgc sponsor had been eliminated by the response. yet this is what the administration says sending a message of deterrence looks like? let's be honest here. do our allies see in this behavior us willing to impose

sdee sieve coes -- decisive cost on our adversaries? in the middle east, we already know the answer. since the president telegraphed a response to the deadly tower 22 attack, iran-backed terrorists have already launched more attacks from iraq and syria to the red sea. iran and its proxies are undeterred, but beyond the region is there any reason to expect that the president's conduct of foreign policy is causing putin or xi to think again? not a chance. no doubt the commander in chief halting response to tehran's aggression emboldens moscow. russian forces, like iran and its proxies, were direct beneficiaries of president biden's hesitation and self-deterrence as they

escalated their invasion of ukraine. and beijing after it watched us abandon allies in afghanistan and second-guess israel's response to terrorism has a reason to doubt that the u.s. is well positioned to rally allies and partners to resist aggression in the indo-pacific. america fails to stand with our partners on the front line in europe and the middle east, we will shred our credibility with friends in the indo-pacific. so today's strategic competition is more perilous, support of our allies is more tenuous. more questionable than it was three years ago. these are the circumstances in which the senate must consider some weighty responsibilities of our own.

to invest in the hard power that the president instinctivelily shies away from exercising, to commit to allies that fear being abandoned, and to address the requirements of long-term competition that becomes more difficult the longer america neglects its leading role. mr. durbin: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority whip. mr. durbin: mr. president, after i complete my remarks, the following is going to be the schedule of speakers on the floor before the roll call vote. it is a bipartisan agreement. i ask unanimous consent that following my remarks, the

following senators be permitted to speak prior to the scheduled vote -- senator lankford of oklahoma for up to 30 minutes, senator murray of washington up to 10 minutes, senator sinema of arizona up to 15 minutes, and senator schumer for up to 5 minutes. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: thank you. mr. president, i listened to the statements that were made this morning on the floor and this afternoon on the floor of the senate, and there were some omissions of fact which need to be reminded to the people who are following. it was four months ago when we faced a deadline to come up with assistance for ukraine. you know what's been going there for two years? a war fought by the most courageous people i know, the ukrainians, against the invasion of vladimir putin. the united states, nato allies and many others have been standing behind the ukrainians and we knew they needed additional resources to continue the battle this year.

four months ago the president put together a supplemental appropriations bill for that purpose. it also addressed the situation in the middle east, the far east, and the looming humanitarian crises around the world, including gaza, that needed to be addressed. we wanted to move on this on a timely basis, but there was an objection. the objection came from the other side of the aisle, republican senators, who said you need to include border security. what is happening on our southern border cannot be ignored. we discussed it for a period of time and then agreed with them. we were going to work together on a bipartisan basis, republicans and democrats, to change what was happening on america's southern border, to make us safe and to bring order to the situation. several of our colleagues were chosen to engage in the negotiations for this issue. this is a tough issue.

any issue involving immigration is extremely difficult. that's why it's been over 30 years since congress has passed immigration reform, when we know that the body of laws that governs our immigration and our border needed attention long ago. three senators, very diverse senators, were chosen to negotiate an agreement if they could. they were led by senator lankford, james lankford, republican of oklahoma, who was chosen by the republican senate caucus to be their negotiator. several of my colleagues on the republican side of the aisle assured me that he had worked hard at it, understood the issue, was prepared to accept this challenge and responsibility. so senator lankford led in that regard. two other senators, senator sinema of arizona, who is characterized as an independent senator at this point in her career; and senator chris murphy

of connecticut were the third senators who sat down and started negotiating together. they put together a package. it took them four months. we had to postpone the negotiations for christmas, for other breaks that were normal on the senate calendar. but they were given wide berth to come up with an agreement, a bipartisan agreement, and it was announced last sunday. senator schumer, the democratic leader, released it on sunday and said i'll heed the advice from senators on both sides of the aisle that members should have 72 hours to review this document before they have to vote on it. the vote we're talking about this afternoon is that vote, more than p 2 hours after the -- more than 72 hours after this proposed bill was released. what would this bill do that would gain the support of the republican and democrat senators negotiating it? it addressed many issues, primarily border issues that related to security. the current situation at our

border is unsustainable. we are being overwhelmed by the number of people who are showing up at record numbers. that reflects several things. refugee crisis around the world. those of you who watched "-60 minutes" this week noticed there are people from china coming to our southern border to come into the united states. no one anticipated that when we talked about the asylum laws several years ago, but that is a fact of life. people are coming from all around the world to come to our southern border, and they are overwhelming the resources of that border. this bill, this agreed-to bill, this bipartisan bill that is being considered here this afternoon, was an effort by both sides to limit the number of people coming across the border at any given time. it gave new authority to the president of the united states to cap and limit the number of people crossing the border at a given time. when those on the other side say we don't need this bill, that is legislative authority that the president currently doesn't have and was included.

there were billions of dollars in investment in technology to stop the flow of not only those who were undocumented and illegal, but also the flow of fentanyl into the united states. just to name two major features of this bill, it had many provisions hammered out over months of negotiation. those of us who came back this week said we're finally going to do something on the border, and the good news is it's bipartisan. senator lankford has signed off on it and the other two senators representing the democratic side of the aisle signed off on it as well. and we were prepared to see this pass and hoped for the best in the house of representatives. and then the bottom dropped out. one thing happened that we didn't anticipate. one person in america came out against the proposal. one person said to the republican senators, sorry, no matter what you agreed to, it's unacceptable. blame it on me, he said, but we're not going to have a bipartisan agreement on the border. this is unacceptable.

that one person is donald trump. he made that announcement at that point, many of the republicans who indicated an interest in this measure walked away from it. and today i'm afraid we're going to see that in the vote. it's really sad when you consider what's at stakes, the lives are at stake all across the united states. people who are trying to come to this country with good intentions and good purposes that would make us a better nation are being caught up in this political battle. so when senator schumer comes to the floor and expresses his disappointment, he speaks for the entire senate democratic caucus. we are disappointed that we came up with a bipartisan bill with senators lankford who has been a stalwart in this whole experience. he's shown principles and values. he negotiated in good faith. he produced a bipartisan bill and we're prepared to vote for it this afternoon. the sad realty is the assistance to ukraine, which was one of the original reasons for this conversation, is still in doubt.

i hope at the end of the day that the democrats can lead the way with the republicans and provide the survival assistance absolutely necessary for the people in ukraine. they are watching carefully. at the end of next week a group of us will be going to a munich security conference in germany. it's held each year. it's a bipartisan delegation. and we go to speak for the united states. what we have to say to our european allies will depend on the votes that we'll follow today, first and the second vote. will we stand by ukraine or will we walk away from it and let vladimir putin have his dream of an expansion of the former soviet system? i hope not. the people in ukraine deserve better. we need to stand together with them. there's much to be said as to what this means to the rest of the world, but we've been reminded by our nato allies who have been loyal to a fault so far. and i hope that they continue to

be, that we can't walk away from that situation without inviting disastrous consequences around the world. i'm afraid that if we walk away from ukraine, they will struggle to survive. and i hope they do, but it will be a real struggle. in the meantime, it heartens vladimir putin and our adversaries around the world to see us waiver when it comes to staying with the ukranian people. i hope that that vote this afternoon, both voters in a positive way that we can take that message to the rest of the world that we are still there. i also want to say, mr. president, that it's hard to imagine that the party of ronald reagan and john m{l1}c{l0}cain, the party that claimed to take a strong stand against communism played into hands of vladimir putin's hands. the same putin who called the collapse of soviet tyranny the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century.

putin and his enablers are trying to restore soviet glory. at the front of the line is ukraine where the u.s. and allies have helped the glorious ukrainians to repel the russian invasion. what is putin's strategy after suffering staggering losses in equipment and personnel? to bet the united states will allow partnership to interfere with restoring ukraine and hope that president trump returns to the white house. that's putin's dream. just as we learned when it came to the agreement, the bipartisan agreement on border security, donald trump has made it clear that he opposes this continuing assistance to ukraine. you may recall in 2018, trump stood next to putin in helsinki and said he believed putin's denials about interfering in our election while putin smirked at the podium. by failing to pass national security funding we will be playing into putin's hands.

many republicans have spoken loudly about defending ukraine and the nato alliance. they traveled to nato summits to support this mission. they have also visited ukraine followed by press conference with belligerent claims that president biden wasn't doing enough. but today the fate of ukraine hangs in the balance on the floor of the united states senate. it seems too many of my colleagues have been collectively cowered to donald trump. we want to thank the supplemental agreement for their own cynical reasons. is that who congressional republicans are going to entrust with stopping russian aggression? make no mistake, it's not only putin watching and savoring this failure to act. it's iran, china, north korea and others. i think of the late john mccain, how he would look at this situation on the republican side of the aisle today. he was a fierce critic of russian tyranny, especially putin's tyranny. he was the target of putin's early sanctions, as many of us

were as well. john mccain took that as a badge of pride. it's time we show the same courage here in congress and make sure we pass emergency national security funding. i asked, last i checked, protecting democracy and safeguarding american security with bipartisan causes and they should be still. i'd like to make one last point. it's hard for me to see us visit this issue of immigration and not mention an issue that's been near and dear to me for more than two decades. today i want to tell you the story of a dreamer. dr. jacqueline solise. hers is the 139th dreamer story i've told on the floor of the senate. jacqueline was born in peru, imcrotchetyed to this country -- immigrated to this country at ten. she wanted to become a doctor, but didn't think it was possible because she was undocumented. 12 years ago, in response to a bipartisan request from myself and the late senator richard luger, president obama

established the daca program. it's protected more than 800,000 young people like jacqueline, and thanks to daca she was able to attend medical school. i'm proud to say last year she graduated from loyola university chicago stretch college of -- stritch college of medicine. she's now completing her pediatrics residency at emory university hospital. daca allowed her to come out of the shadows and give back to the country she grew up and in loves, the united states. she hopes to be an agent of change in her community where she mentors medical students and first generation low-income students. one of her goals is to open a mobile clinic where she can drive to different communities and help patients. ask yourself, would america be better off if dr. jacqueline solise and dreamers like her could not work in the united states? still we're trying our best. make sure that these young people have a fighting chance to be part of america's future. last september a federal judge

in texas declared the daca program illegal. the decision left in place pro texts for current recipients while the appeal is pending. these young people live in fear that the next court decision will upend their lives. that would be a disaster. on the subject of immigration, the border is critical, it's important, i want to be part of that consideration, but please -- part of that conversation, but please, don't forget the dreamers and so many people who have proven they will be our future and strength if we give them the chance. i yield the floor.

.

mr. lankford: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from oklahoma. mr. lankford: i'd like unanimous consent to be able to use a prop during this speech. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. lankford: in about an hour, this body will gather, there will be 100 senators here to make a decision about what we're going to do to take a step on border security. it's an issue that's bedevilled, quite frankly, this body for decades. it's been three decades since we've passed anything into law to be able to change border security. in the meantime, administration after administration has pieced together the broken pieces of law in the disjointed pieces and tried to make regulatory actions to see what they can do to be able to change the direction of the country. we've seen it just over the last

ten or 15 years. what's really happened with that? this is just an encounter number from cbp. we can look back to 2009 and see the numbers stayed about half a million or so for multiple years. of this is true the obama administration as they struggled, because the numbers were lower than this even before. as they struggled with a half million numbers. we see during the trump administration how the numbers bump up, ump up all the way -- jump up all the way to almost a million in a sing many year, twice what it was in the obama administration. then covid time period, dives back down. then right there is the transition into president biden's time, and the numbers have skyrocketed. they doubled from the boom boom to this year in the trump administration, but then they tripled even from the highest year of the trump administration during the biden administration. it wasn't a single bump year like under the trump administration. it's been year after year after year. by the way, this little one,

that's this fiscal year. that's just sips october, which by the way you'll notice in the last four months is higher than any year under the obama administration and almost as high as the peak year under the trump administration, and that's four months so far this year. americans feel it. we feel it in our cities. we feel it in our schools, in our communities. we see the television and we see all of the chaos on our southern border. cities around the country have said do something, make this stop. americans, whether republican, democrat, or independent, are all unanimous on this issue. this is a problem that needs to be solved. do what you can. today, we get to decide if we're going to do that or not.

if we're going to do nothing, or do something. the bill that's been put together has been a bipartisan effort. welcome to the united states senate. that's what we have to do. while i have people from around the country and back home that say do a republican-only bill, just get all of our priorities and none of theirs, i smile at them and say welcome to governance. you can do a partisan bill in the house, but in the senate we have to look at each other across the aisle, then figure out a way to be able to solve this. sometimes it's in committees, sometimes it's a gathering, sometimes it was like this time, get members together, republican, independent, democrat, to be able to sit down and hash out the issues, to say this a problem, well all agree, we're not going to agree on the solutions, but we all agree this is a problem, but we have to figure out what the slewings

might be. that's -- what the solutions might be. that's been the process the last four months. four months to sit down and hash through the very difficult, very technical issues of border security in our nation, with one goal -- let's make progress. we understood from the beginning we're not going to solve everything. we're not. we knew from the beginning it's not going to be perfect, but we also knew the status quo is untenable. we have to do something to be able to make the status quo better. so that's what we worked towards. to be able to change where we are now. the product we put out this past week crippled allowed -- this past weekend allowed everybody to see it. i had colleagues who said i need weeks to evaluate it because it's so technical, but it is. but some literally within minutes said no, i don't agree. fine. but after time doability review it, the -- to be able to review

it, the border patrol council, the group on the ground managing the chaos, read through, they evaluated it. the border patrol act of 2024 gives the united states border patrol agents authorities codified in law that we have not had in the past, they said. while not perfect, i'll agree with them on that, the border patrol act of 2024 is a step in the right direction and is far better than the current status quo. this is why the national border patrol council endorses this bill and hopes for its quick passage. i understand this, in this bui building and in the 202 area code that is washington, d.c., border security is a political is issue. but if we leave the 202 area code, everywhere else in the country this is not a political issue, it's a national security is issue. when you go to the border patrol council, those that see the chaos day to day, they're saying

send us some help, send us anything, because quite frankly americans are frustrated and angry because our borders are open. they've seen the record numbers in the last four months. they know full well what's happening. the "60 minutes" from this last weekend about chinese nationals using tiktok to find the holes in the fence and navigate it, to connect with mexican cartel members to navigate through mexico to be able to get through, why is that such a big story? because we used to rarely have chinese nationals come across our border, but last year we had 37,000 chinese nationals coming across our border. 37,000. americans watched the story of a group of migrants in new york city ruthlessly beating up a police officer this past week, and then seeing they were released again. they're angry.

they're frustrated. the stories that have come out in the news recently of three child sex traffickers who had attempted reentry back into the ont -- back into the united states make americans go hold on. just a few days ago, the story coming out of a terrorist on our terror watch list that had come across our border and been released just early last week, that they then picked them up while in minnesota, just a few weeks ago. we've had 50 people that have been identified on the terror watch list that we did apprehend in the last four months. we've had tens of thousands of people in the last year that were identified by this administration as individuals, what they call special interest aliens. by definition, they're a national security risk. tens of thousands that we didn't know their name in particular,

but we know where they live is in an area of high national security risk because the high terrorism rate is comingfrom that area. we can't identify them on the terror watch list, but we know there's a high chance they're a national security risk. those individuals were released into the country. americans feel it. they want something different. americans i talk to, the oklahomans i talk to celebrate legal immigration. they just don't want illegal immigration. they want an orderly process. they want to know that the rule of law still matters in america. that's what they want to know. they want to know their american way of life is protected, and that should not be too much to demand. this very divided nation brings to us a very divided congress.

currently we have a republican two-vote majority in the house of representatives and a democrat one-vote majority in the united states senate. it doesn't get much closer than that. -- to being equally divided in two bodies. but that means if we're going to solve something, we have to sit down together and solve it. that's how it works when you make law. you can do press conferences without the other side, but you can't make law without the other side in the united states senate. so we have to sit down and work things out. in october, when israel was ruthlessly attacked with a terrorist attack by hamas, the president of the united states came to congress and said, we need additional funding to help israel, to help ukraine, to help with the threats in taiwan, and additional money for our southern border.

republicans responded by saying, we are not going to help give money to the southern border -- by the way, especially for some of the funding that they asked for on the southern border like safe migration offices to be able to help facilitate a greater traffic to the united states. we said, we're not going to do that. we're not going to give additional money to the southern border unless we get a change in law in policy. it's not a radical concept, quite frankly. the house of representatives last year passed a very comprehensive bill on border security that they call h.r. 2. it was one of their priorities. you know why? because the house of representatives at that time said we need a change in law. so they brought a bill to change the law for that. we said the same thing. we need a change in law. because it's something what has occurred. we need to address it. the frightening thing is, since we started meeting on a bipartisan way in october,

october was the highest number of illegal crossings in any october in our history. november was the highest number of illegal crossings of any november in our history. december was the highest november of illegal crossings of any december in our history. and the highest single month in history of illegal crossings, including having the highest single day ever in the history of our country in illegal crossings. over 12,000 in a single day a that's what's happened just since we've been negotiating this bill trying to be able to get to a solution. the problem has not gotten better. it's gotten worse during that time period. we need to solve this. worst-case scenario is status quo. would end to solve it. so we came up with a bill. doesn't have everything in it i wanted. doesn't have everything in it my democratic colleagues wanted. but it definitely makes a difference. what's in this bill? well, here's what the bill

includes. let me just walk through some of the high points of it. it includes more border wall construction. under the 18-foot, 13-foot ballard-style definition, in locations set by president trump in those cases to build the call. it ends our catch and release issue. the vast majority of adults end up being held rather than being screen -- and being held -- screened there rather than being released. we add additional money for state, local, and tribal law enforcement to help with enforcement process. we have a tremendous increase in the number offize h. ice agents, the number of border patrol agents, more asylum officers, more immigration judges. we added detection equipment at our ports of entry to interdict fentanyl, one of the biggest threats to our nation right now. and we increased the sanction authority for the united states government to be able to

sanction those ruthless cartels and members of cartels and those that facilitate them to be able to go after the fentanyl issue in the united states. it has a pretty cal radical change in asylum law in it. it strengthen the standard of evidence. today people crossing the border can literally cross and say i have fear in my country. when they say those magic words, they are released in the country for up to ten years while they await their screening or hearing. that would end under this bill. we increase the standard for evidence. we add three new eligibility bars at the beginning of it so we get to a faster screening process and for those that are not eligible, a faster deportation. it is somewhat a where's waldo game on a day-to-day base. as we have thousands of people coming, some of those individuals do qualify for asylum. but most do not. so our goal was to be able to filter through quickly, identify

those that qualify and deport those that do not. we have a quicker way to process aliens when they cross the border so they don't end up in the ten-year backlog awaiting their decision. both for those who qualify for asylum don't wait ten years and that's that everyone knows -- those that everyone knows from are the beginning don't equal fay for asylum, they're turned around and deported immediately. this ends the use of parole that's happening on our southern border today. today the administration will identify 1,500 people, will give them parole authority at one of our ports of entry, and a work permit the first day they come. they don't have to equal fay for asylum. they don't even have to apply for asylum. it is an open invitation for anyone anywhere in the world if you tell us in advance that you're coming. it's not lawful. it's just happening. this bill would end that. this bill also has a short-term

three-year authority to quickly stop the flow of people coming into our country right now. i had a lot of my colleagues on the republican side that said, whatever we pass, we'll never be -- it'll never be implemented by the biden administration. we've got to do something right now to get things to change. because everyone knows this is occurring not because of some migration trends around the world but because right there president biden announced, i'm not going to build anymore wall, and he dropped all the authorities that had been used, not just by president trump but by president trump and obama, dropped them and we saw the skyrocket. whatever we pass, president president biden will never use. whatever you can put in there to make this end, please do. so we didment we included a border emergency authority that said if we ever exceed 5,000 people -- which by the way is every day but seven in the last

four months -- if we ever exceed 5,000 people and we're at chaos level, the border shuts down. completely. it's not optional. it's mandatory. and when i say shut down, it's pretty simple. what happens in the first 5,000? for the first 5,000 coming across, they're detain, they're screened, and then ported. if -- and then deports. if you get above 35,000, we just -- if you get above 5,000, we just detain and deport. that's the shift that occurs. it's not that the first 5,000 are released. that's ridiculous. the first 5,000 we detain, we screen, and then we deport. the second -- if we get above 5,000, we just detain and deport. and when you borders close down or, it's closed down for weeks. where we're not even screening for weeks until we get caught

up. it was something that we could implement right now and be able to make a difference. we also changed the funding process on this. there are items that the president really wanted on some of the funding, so we said, we're fine on that funding as long as you don't get that funding until you actually get more detention beds, get more deportation flights, hire more ice officers, hire more border patrol and actually implement the new policy. when you do that, then you get all the money that you're actually looking for in the other areas. we wanted to make sure that actually this was going to be implemented. so we included that in the bill today. that's what we have on the floor today, and i'm afraid what i've heard some people say, it's not enough. so we'll make a decision soon. let me just say this. i've listened to a the although

of my colleagues in the last -- i've listened to a lot of my colleagues in the last several days, as well i should. i've listened for months. some people legitimately want more time to read the bill. it is 370 pages. it is incredibly technical and i've had several colleagues say, it makes my head to read it because immigration law is very economy indicated. so they're -- immigration law is very complicated. so they're going through it. they're just saying, i need more time. they legitimately just need more time. i understand that. there are some folks who are voting no today because they have policy differences on the bill. we have asylum officers that are empowered to make decisions. they want immigration judges to make it. okay, that's a policy difference on it. some folks don't like that we have visas that are in this. that increase legal immigration. not illegal. legal immigration. there are some folks that don't want any immigration of any type. fine. we can have that policy

difference. i don't mind legal immigration. i just don't want illegal immigration. some of them have been very clear with me. they have political differences with the bill. they say it's the wrong time to solve the problem. or let the presidential election solve this problem. in fact, i had a popular commentator four weeks ago that had a talked to that told me flat out before they knew any of the contents of the bill, any of the contents, nothing was out at that point, that told me flat out, if you try to move a bill that solves the border crisis during this presidential year, i will do whatever i can to destroy you. because i do not want you to solve this during the presidential election. by the way, they have been faithful to their promise and have done everything they can to destroy me. -- in the past several weeks.

there are other folks that read the facebook post and the twitter post and saw different facts that they thought might be true, but i personally have told them over and over again they're false. and it's been hard to overcome. for some reason we still believe everything we read on the internet. and it has been hard 20 break through. a few weeks ago i posted one of my favorite quotes from a preacher from england in the 1850's where he said a lie gets halfway around the world before the truth gets its boots on. it couldn't have proved to be more true in this. i've seen posts like, there's amnesty in this bill. i would say to some of -- i would say some of my democratic colleagues wanted to have

amnesty but there's not. i've heard some say it weakens our asylum laws when it does the opposite. we can get to actual asylees faster and those who are gaming the system are turned around. some say it takes away the remain in mexico policy so it can never come back. it does nothing of that at all. nothing of that. i've had folks say it gives away work permits. it'll incentive more folks to come. it actually removes the 1,500 work permits passed out every day. and my favorite one, it lets 5,000 aliens in every single day from here on out forever. and i have just said, that's completely absurd. why would anyone, anyone sign a bill, approve a bill, or present a bill that locks us into this chaos? that's what we have now. the 5,000 piece was very simple.

if you get to 5,000 a day we h., we can't -- if you get to 5,000 a day, we can't process that many. many everything is shut down so we can make sure that we can actually legally process people. we are detaining, screening and deporting until we get to a break glass moment. and then we're not even screening anymore. we're just detaining and deporting because we can't manage the numbers. but that's not what's been told. what's been told has been false day after day a day after day. i've had a few folks who have said, if i can't get everything, i want nothing. i don't find most americans are that way just in their day-to-day life. we have high goals and aspirations as americans. i don't blame americans for

being really angry and frustrated at the border. but what i hear from most oklahomans is, do something. don't just sit there. do something. make progress. but don't allow this to keep going. stop it where you -- stop it where you can. so that's what we worked to do. to be clear, president biden has authorities he could have used. -- that he's chosen not to. authorities that president trump used, authorities that president obama used. president biden has chosen not to use. there's a lot of them. and for whatever reason, he has turned his head away from the chaos that america is focused on and he needs to do what he can. to solve this problem. but we also need to make changes in law. our asylum law is weak. everyone knows it.

in fact, when president trump was president, he even made the statements about how weak our laws are on asylum. when president trump was president, he said we do a very good job considering the laws are so bad. they're not arrest kayak. they're incompetent. it's not that they're old. they're just bad. guess what this bill does? it fixes that, because the laws have a gap, and we should actually fix those things. what the president cannot do is change the asylum laws. he cannot change the faster deportations for people crossing. he cannot add an emergency authority like this. he cannot conduct faster hearings with limited appeals so we can get to deporting people that are not legal here and addressing those that are. he can't do that without a change in law. so we need to change the law.

madam president, i'm going to vote yes to be able to move on to this bill because we need a change in law. i understand we have differences, but we've got to sit down together, figure out how we're going to solve problems, because the american people sent us here to do that. this is the pen that i was handed at that desk when i was sworn in to the united states se senate. and i signed a book that was at that desk with this pen because i was becoming a united states sen senator, because the people at home sent me here to get stuff home and to solve problems. there's no reason for me to have this pen if we're just going to do press conferences.

i can do press conferences from anywhere. but we can only make law from this room, and to do that, you need one of these pens, and there's 100 of them in this room, and 60 of us have to agree to solve a problem. and i'm determined to sit down with anyone who wants to solve the problem, regardless of what side of the aisle that they're on, to figure out how we solve these things. because americans are ticked off that this is not resolved, and they expect us to get things done. so why don't we do that. madam president, i have two staff members named sarah sites and jacob stubs who worked their tail off. they gave up thanksgiving, they gave up christmas, they gave up new year's to work on this.

remarkable leaders. but it's not just about the time they gave up and the wisdom that they have as leaders. their focus on that was to solve a problem, that at the end of this day may still be a problem unsolved. and tomorrow we'll probably have 6,500 people illegally cross our border just like as what's happening right now today. 6,500 people. americans want that stopped. so let's actually sit down and figure out how we're going to stop it together. with that, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from washington. mrs. murray: madam president, i come to speak before the vote today, but i do hope that all of

my colleagues heard the senator from oklahoma, heard his powerful words, especially the last several minutes, and pause and think about it. they were critically important for each of us to think about, and i thank the senator for all of his work on this and for his powerful statement just now. but, madam president, if you want to understand why people can't stand politics, watch how many republicans vote against this bill. some of my colleagues do not seem to understand this is not a game. there is a war happening right now in ukraine where our allies are being gunned down, and putin is rolling his tanks into their homeland. there is a war happening right now between israel and hamas. there are civilians at this very moment caught in the crossfire. there are partners in the

indo-pacific wondering if they can count on us. and let's not forget, there is the border, the site of countless republican photo ops where we have a genuine need of reforms and resources. that's the moment we're in. that's the moment that this package is meant to address. and by voting it down, republicans will be telling our allies our word cannot be trusted. telling dictators like putin that our threats are not serious. telling the world american leadership has been hollowed out by republican obstructionism. and let's be clear, they will be telling the american people they don't want to solve the crisis at the border. they want to campaign on it. because if you genuinely believe

something is a crisis, you take any step you can to address it. you don't let a fire burn because donald trump wants to campaign on ashes. we've heard a lot of talk from republicans about the border, about countering the chinese government, about supporting israel and standing up to putin. but governing is about action. governing is about compromise. governing is about standing behind your word in order to solve problems. and i'm sorry to say that despite the talk from many republicans about continuing to support ukraine, they have yet to join us in actually voting for serious aid to ukraine since last congress. as the minority leader admitted yesterday, this was all because his side, republicans, insisted, insisted ukraine aid be tied to

border policies. a snashgsd by the way, that -- a standard, by the way, that they have not applied to any of our other allies and one that tells every country who would partner with us, you better hope you don't become leverage for an unrelated partisan demand. it was an absurd request. i have said so from the start. but, madam president, a lot hangs in the balance. so democrats, listened to them and took them at their word and have been glued to the negotiating table in order to address this problem. and i want to thank from the bottom of my heart, to my colleagues, to senator sinema, to senator lankford, senator murphy, they worked so long and hard to hammer out a deal on border policies, one that is, quite frankly, more conservative than many of us would have liked, including myself. but i worked tirelessly with my vice chair, the senior senator from maine, to ensure that the

border resources were there to help address this problem. and through listening and compromising and working together in good faith, we reached a bipartisan agreement to fund the border policies that others negotiated. and now after saying they had to have both of these in the package in order to support it, republicans are now poised to kill it. republicans went from we demand border policy changes to no policy is needed. they went from we need time to look at this bill to dead on arrival, in less than 24 hours. they went from the border is a crisis right now to it can wait until november. in the blink of an eye, and will not support the bipartisan policy nor the bipartisan funding. what changed?

what changed? well, donald trump ordered republicans to kill the bipartisan border deal. trump has not been subtle. he has literally said please blame it on me if this deal goes down in flames and this's no action on the border. madam president, we're going to see today just how many republicans fall in line, and it may well be most of them. but, madam president, i would remind my colleagues the american people are the ones who sent us here, not donald trump. they are the ones we should answer to, not donald trump. and i think we all know the folks back home sent us here to solve problems, to solve problems. not to block bipartisan solutions. they want us to work together. they want us to make progress, even when it isn't perfect. and, frankly, if that doesn't convince you to support this bill, if you are still thinking about what's good politics, not

good policy, i still don't know why you would listen to donald trump. because solving problems, that is good politics. maintaining america's national security, that is good politics. so i hope all of my republican colleagues will think about this vote carefully. how long will you give donald trump a permanent veto over whatever policy he decides he doesn't like or isn't helpful to him personally? i have to ask what is the point of being a senator if you let donald trump make all of the decisions for you. it wasn't so long ago that donald trump incited a national insurrection. we all had to flee or barricade ourselves in our offices. did any of my colleagues on the other side think you would let that same man dictate what

policy you could or couldn't even debate? it was just three short years ago that some of you on the other side and some of us voted to remove trump from office. i ask my colleagues, please, listen when i say today is a critical vote. today is a day to decide. today is a vote about whether we, as united states senators, will keep our word when we negotiate with each other. today is a day we as united states senators will vote to show we will work together to stand up for american interests and national security at home and abroad. and today is a day we as senators show the world we are a country who stand behind our word and stand with our allies

and works past politics to do what is right for this country and the people we were sent here to represent. i hope my colleagues will think about that long and hard, and then i sincerely hope they will do the right thing and abandon the maga politics. there is so much work we have left to do together moving forward, and you should all know me well enough to know i'm always ready to work together, not against one another. so, madam president, even if this vote fails, i am determined to not let partisanship win the day. we are going to try again to pass a package that gets our allies the aid they so desperately need, and i hope before we get to that, that every senator in this body listens to what the senator from oklahoma said and pauses and thinks about what their word means to the people who sent

them here to do the right thing for our country. thank you, madam president. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from arizona. ms. sinema: i stand here today as the border crisis is devastating my state. just last week nogales officers seized 2.1 million fentanyl pills. just last week border patrol agent seized in the tucson desert enough fentanyl to kill 3,040 americans. just last week nearly 14,000 migrants crossed into arizona. many of them are military-age men coming from all across the globe. our broken border system is a national security crisis. last september, when my republican colleagues demanded with a clear and unified voice

that border security must be included in congress' national security package, i wholeheartedly agreed. finally, it seemed, we had the opportunity to solve the nightmare my state has lived for over 40 years. so i got to work. my republican colleagues chose senator james lankford, my partner, on the homeland security border management subcommittee. we have worked together for over five years on strong border policy. senator lankford has joined me at the arizona border to see the crisis firsthand. senator lankford is an incredibly smart, earnest, conservative lawmaker. i know he was chosen by his conference because of his expertise and knowledge of border security policy and his reputation as a serious, conservative lawmaker who cares deeply about getting policy right.

as we started the negotiations, senator lankford laid out four policy pillars the republican conference needed to secure the border. number one, asylum. raise the asylum standard and close the loopholes so cartels and economic migrants can no longer exploit the system. number two, save third country. ensure people who lived safely in another country don't backlog our system because they do not qualify for asylum. number three, close the border. create a title 42-like authority to shut down the border when our system is backlogged and overwhelmed. number four, parole. stop the administration from giving migrants at the border a free pass into our country. over the course of nearly five months, we worked every single day navigating intricate and difficult policy decisions to meet these four pillars. and when we hit bumps, i

reminded everyone at the table about what was happening on the ground at my border, what real life looks like in arizona because i knew that those four key pillars were necessary to secure the border and solve the crisis. you know, that's why just yesterday when endorsing our bill, yuma mayor doug nicoles said thank you for incorporating many of the specific issues that border leaders have asked to be addressed. so together with senators lankford and murphy and our incredibly talented staffs, including my staff director on the border management subcommittee, anthony papian who is here today, we worked through weekends and through holidays to get these policies right. senator murphy, senator lankford, and i, we all negotiated in good faith. we delivered. we produced a bill many thought

impossible. our bill overhauls the broken system. it stops the misuse of parole, and it closes the border during surges ensuring the quick detention and deportation of migrants who don't have a legal right to be here. we end catch and release. we add more detention beds. we increase deportation flights. we quickly decide asylum claims. we put border patrol back in the desert catching the bad guys and the drugs. and that's why the national border patrol council endorses our bill, not h.r. 2. we produced a bill that finally after decades of all talk and no action secures the border and solves the border crisis. our bill was ready for prime time. we were ready to bring the bill to the floor, open it up for debate and amendments. you know, how the senate is

supposed to work. and then pass the bill. but less than 24 hours after we released the bill, my republican colleagues changed their minds. turns out they want all talk and no action. it turns out border security is not a risk to our national security. it's just a talking point for the election. after all of their cable news appearances, after all those campaign photo ops in the desert, after all those trips to the border, this crisis isn't actually much of a crisis after all. sunday morning there was a real crisis at the border. monday morning that crisis magically disappeared. well, guess what, guys, the crisis is real. it's real in arizona. on sunday, the day we released our bill, over 6,000 migrants crossed the border. on monday, the day this body decided the border crisis was no

longer a crisis, over 6 j 500 -- 6 j 500 migrants crossed the border and yesterday, the day my republican conference members said we were not going to pass a border bill, the day my colleague said no, nearly 7,000 migrants crossed the border. the border emergency authority and our border bill would have shut the border down literally. every single day this year. now, i've been sharing the facts of our bill to anyone who would listen. i refuted the lie that says our bill allows 5,000 migrants to enter the country every day. in fact, our bill stops those migrants from coming into the country every day. meanwhile, by killing our bill, we have no title 42-like authority to shut down the border. so 5,000, 6,000, 7,000, 10,000, or even 14,000 migrants can cross into our country every

single day. make no mistake, a vote against this bill is a vote for the status quo. it is a vote for continued chaos at our border. our current system let's migrants into the country with nothing but a piece of paper, a notice to appear, for a court date years into the future, and no accountability structure to ensure they actually show up. in arizona this broken system is commonly called catch and release. it's been happening for years. our bill ends catch and release, but when this bill fails, catch and release will continue every single day. some people say the president has all the authority he needs to secure the border. then tell me why arizona has lived the nightmare of our border crisis for over 40 years and through the past five

administrations, republican and democrat. before covid, the last administration tried to shut down the border. the court stopped it. after covid the court struck down title 42. it is clear we need a law. i've heard from some that the only solution is the house republican bill, h.r. 2. to them i point out that our bill, unlike h.r. 2, actually includes penalties for those who try to cross the border when it shut down creating a one-year bar for anyone who tries to cross twice. h.r. 2, no consequences. h.r. 2 continues the current flawed policy that allows migrants to get work permits without any asylum interview. our bill ends that. that's idea conservative "wall street journal" editorial board called our bill the most restricted migrant legislation in decades. we make sure that only those

actually fleeing violence and persecution can stay here and work after they pass a new, faster, tougher screening. and if someone doesn't finish the asylum process, their work permit gets taken away. h.r. 2, silent. h.r. 2 doesn't even fund new detention beds, guys. h.r. 2, another example of all talk and no action. so if you want to spend the border crisis for your own political agendas, go right ahead. if you want to continue to use the southern border as a backdrop for your political campaign, that's fine. good luck to you. but i have a very clear message for anyone using the southern border for staged political events. don't come to arizona. take your political theater to texas. do not bring it to my state. because in arizona we're serious.

we don't have time for your political games. we are not interested in you posing for the cameras. in arizona we are busy. just ask county ranchers david and tina thompson. they live in the reality of our broken border every time that migrants attempt to break into their home. ask business bee -- bisbee city councilmember leslie johns who had to open the doors of the town city council building and clear out the chamber fors migrants to sleep on the floor after they were released into a tiny town with no shelter and just one bus stop. or ask yuma farmer john bolts who does his best to manage his farm despite the lettuce crops constantly trampled by migrants crossing his produce fields. or ask better debt, the manager of why not travel convenience star in arizona who lost thousands of dollars every day

before christmas while the lukeville port of entry was closed. or ask sierra vista mayor clea mccaw who lays in bed at night scared that his teenage daughter could die in one of the daily, deadly high-speed chases of teenagers smuggling drugs and people from the border up to phoenix and next into your state. or ask bisbee mayor ken budge who is pleading with each and every one of you to understand how your political games hurt border towns like his. as he said yesterday, i am saddened after all these months now some senators have second thoughts about this from both parties. i would like to ask any of them to reverse their roles and trade places with me, how they would like to live in my home as a helicopter circled my home at 6:30 in the morning for about an

hour as was the case today. this is life in my border state. this is arizona. earlier this week it was noted while facts on the border haven't changed, the politics in the country have changed. i guess that's it. the politics changed. three weeks ago everyone wanted to solve the border crisis. yesterday no one did. for four months we were stymied on action to support our allies and stand up to putin's illegal war. for four months we've been unable to move forward, unable to defend democracy overseas because of the urgent need to secure our border, and then suddenly in the last 48 hours, the border no longer matters. some in this chamber say just let's drop it. hey, let's wait for the

election. let's sort this out in the next congress. let's move on. arizona can't move on. you here can decide this crisis is over. but the crisis is still real in my state, and it will be tomorrow and the next day and the next day. you know, i usually end my speeches by calling on the better angels of our nature. when we work together we can solve problems. we did that here. and you decided no. you decided you don't even want to debate it. you don't want to amend it. you don't want to tackle the problem. partisanship won. the senate has failed arizona. shameful. i yield back. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: first i thank the

senator from arizona for her strong, courageous, and heartfelt words. now, briefly, madam president, senators have a chance to show precisely where they stand. are they for border security? or are they not? the choice is plain and simple. and this vote will show precisely who is serious about securing the border and who is not. we hope our republican colleagues, so many of whom know this is the right thing to do, will not bend to the wishes of donald trump who only wants chaos. now, madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum call for the cloture motion on the motion to proceed to h.r. 815 be waived. the presiding officer: is there an objection?

without objection. the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to proceed to calendar number 30, h.r. 815, an act to amend title 38, united states code and so forth and for other purposes signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on the motion to proceed to h.r. 815, an act to amend title 38, united states code, to make certain improvements relating to the eligibility of veterans to receive reimbursement for emergency treatment furnished through the veterans community care program and other purposes shall be brought to the close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote: the clerk: ms. baldwin. mr. barrasso. mr. bennet. mrs. blackburn.

mr. blumenthal. mr. booker. mr. boozman. mr. braun. mrs. britt. mr. brown. mr. budd. ms. butler. ms. cantwell. mrs. capito. mr. cardin. mr. carper. mr. casey. mr. cassidy. ms. collins. mr. coons. mr. cornyn. ms. cortez masto. mr. cotton. mr. cramer. mr. crapo. mr. cruz. mr. daines. ms. duckworth. mr. durbin. ms. ernst. mr. fetterman. mrs. fischer. mrs. gillibrand. mr. graham. mr. grassley. mr. hagerty.

ms. hassan. mr. hawley. mr. heinrich. mr. hickenlooper. ms. hirono. mr. hoeven. mrs. hyde-smith. mr. johnson. mr. kaine. mr. kelly. mr. kennedy. mr. king. ms. klobuchar.

mr. lankford. mr. lee. mr. lujan. ms. lummis. mr. manchin. mr. markey. mr. marshall. mr. mcconnell. mr. menendez. mr. merkley. mr. moran. mr. mullin. ms. murkowski. mr. murphy. mrs. murray. mr. ossoff. mr. padilla.

mr. paul. mr. peters. mr. reed. mr. ricketts. mr. risch. mr. romney. ms. rosen. mr. rounds. mr. rubio. mr. sanders. mr. schatz. mr. schmitt. mr. schumer.

mr. scott of florida. mr. scott of south carolina. mrs. shaheen. ms. sinema. ms. smith. ms. stabenow. mr. sullivan. mr. tester. mr. thune. mr. tillis. mr. tuberville. mr. van hollen. mr. vance. mr. warner. mr. warnock. ms. warren. mr. welch. mr. whitehouse.

mr. wicker. mr. wyden. mr. young. the clerk: senators voting in the affirmative -- cantwell, cortez masto, durbin, klobuchar, lankford, murray, rosen, schatz, sinema, stabenow, whitehouse.

senators voting in the negative -- blackburn, budd, johnson, marshall, menendez, and paul. mr. brown, aye.

the clerk: mr. schumer, aye.

the clerk: mr. warner, aye.

the clerk: ms. murkowski, aye, mr. welch, aye.

the clerk: ms. duckworth, aye. the clerk: mr. casey, aye.

the clerk: mr. carper, aye. mr. parties, aye. -- mr. peters, aye. mr. bennet, aye. mr. kelly, aye. mrs. shaheen, aye.

the clerk: ms. hassan, aye. the clerk: mr. hickenlooper, aye. mr. fetterman, aye.

the clerk: mr. reed, aye.

vote: the clerk: mr. van hollen, aye. ms. warren, no.

the clerk: mr. markey, no. the clerk: mr. scott of south carolina, no. mr. king, aye.

the clerk: mrs. hyde-smith, no. mr. hagerty, no. mr. tester, aye. mr. kaine, aye.

the clerk: mrs. gillibrand, aye.

the clerk: mr. wyden, aye.

the clerk: mr. sanders, no.

the clerk: mr. cardin, aye.

mr. warnock, aye. the clerk: mr. braun, no.

the clerk: mr. boozman, no.

the clerk: ms. smith, aye.

the clerk: mrs. britt, no.

the clerk: mr. tuberville, no. mr. merkley, aye. mr. barrasso, no. mr. blumenthal, aye.

vote:

the clerk: mr. heinrich, aye. the clerk: mr. padilla, no.

the clerk: mr. murphy, aye. mrs. capito, no.

mr. hawley, no.

the clerk: mr. ossoff, aye.

the clerk: mr. grassley, no.

the clerk: mr. coons, aye.

the clerk: mr. crapo, no. mr. risch, no. ms. collins, aye.

the clerk: ms. baldwin, aye.

the clerk: mr. scott of florida, no.

the clerk: mr. romney, aye.

mr. tillis, no. the clerk: ms. ernst, no. mr. moran, no. mr. rubio, no. mr. cotton, no. mr. lujan, aye.

mr. schmitt, no. mr. wicker, no. mr. ricketts, no. mr. cramer, no.

the clerk: mr. daines, no. the clerk: ms. hirono, aye. the clerk: mr. young, no.

mrs. fischer, no.

the clerk: mr. cornyn, no. mr. kennedy, no. mr. mullin, no.

the clerk: mr. graham, no.

the clerk: mr. mcconnell, no.

the clerk: mr. vance, no.

the clerk: mr. hoeven, no. mr. thune, no. mr. sullivan, no. the clerk: mr. cruz, no.

mr. lee, no. mr. booker, aye.

the clerk: mr. rounds, no.

the clerk: ms. butler, aye. mr. cassidy, no.

vote:

the clerk: mr. schumer, no.

the presiding officer: on this vote, the yeas are 49, the nays are 50. three-fifths of the senators duly chosen and sworn not having voted in the affirmative, the motion is not agreed to. mr. schumer: madam president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: i move to reconsider the vote whereby cloture was not invoked on the motion to proceed to h.r. 815 and i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. the clerk: ms. baldwin.

mr. barrasso. mr. bennet. mrs. blackburn. mr. blumenthal. mr. booker. mr. boozman. mr. braun. mrs. britt. mr. brown.

mr. budd. ms. butler. ms. cantwell. mrs. capito. mr. cardin. mr. carper. mr. casey. mr. cassidy. ms. collins. mr. coons. mr. cornyn. ms. cortez masto. mr. cotton. mr. cramer. mr. crapo. mr. cruz. mr. daines. ms. duckworth. mr. durbin. ms. ernst. mr. fetterman. mrs. fischer. mrs. gillibrand. mr. graham. mr. grassley. mr. hagerty. ms. hassan. mr. hawley.

mr. heinrich. mr. hickenlooper. ms. hirono. mr. hoeven. mrs. hyde-smith. mr. johnson. mr. kaine. mr. kelly. mr. kennedy. mr. king. ms. klobuchar. mr. lankford. mr. lee. mr. lujan. ms. lummis. mr. manchin. mr. markey. mr. marshall. mr. mcconnell. mr. menendez. mr. merkley.

mr. moran. mr. mullin. ms. murkowski. mr. murphy. mrs. murray. mr. ossoff. mr. padilla. mr. paul. mr. peters. mr. reed. mr. ricketts. mr. risch. mr. romney. ms. rosen. mr. rounds. mr. rubio. mr. sanders. mr. schatz. mr. schmitt. mr. schumer. mr. scott of florida. mr. scott of south carolina. mrs. shaheen. ms. sinema. ms. smith. ms. stabenow.

mr. sullivan. mr. tester. mr. thune. mr. tillis. mr. tuberville. mr. van hollen. mr. vance. mr. warner. mr. warnock. ms. warren. mr. welch. mr. whitehouse. mr. wicker. mr. wyden. mr. young.

the clerk: senators voting in the affirmative, baldwin, bennet, brown, butler, cantwell, carper, duckworth, durbin, grassley, hassan, heinrich, king, klobuchar, manchin, murkowski, murphy, murray, padilla, rosen, shaheen, sinema, stabenow. senators voting in the negative, blackburn, cassidy, cruz. ms. hirono, aye.

the clerk: mr. lee, no. vote:

the clerk: mr. casey, aye. mr. merkley, aye. mr. coons, aye. mr. britt, no. mr. barrasso, no.

mr. tuberville, no. the clerk: mr. paul, no. mr. booker, aye.

the clerk: mr. kaine, aye. mr. johnson, no. mr. hagerty, no. the clerk: mr. wicker, no. mr. rounds, no.

the clerk: mr. risch, no.

mr. van hollen, aye. mr. ricketts, no. the clerk: mr. boozman, no.

mr. warner, aye. ms. collins, aye.

the clerk: mr. schmitt, no.

mr. welch, aye. mr. braun, no. mr. wyden, aye.

the clerk: mrs. fischer, no. mr. lujan, aye. mr. cornyn, no.

the clerk: mr. whitehouse, aye. mr. scott of south carolina, no.

the clerk: mr. cotton, no.

the clerk: mr. markey, aye.

mr. graham, no.

the clerk: mr. kennedy, aye. mr. reed, aye.

the clerk: mr. kelly, aye. mr. peters, aye. mr. daines, no. vote:

the clerk: mr. fetterman, aye. mr. cramer, no. mr. scott of florida, no.

the clerk: mr. schatz, aye. the clerk: mr. moran, aye. mr. young, aye. mr. mullin, no.

the clerk: mr. marshall, no. mr. budd, no.

the clerk: mrs. hyde-smith, no. the clerk: mrs. gillibrand, aye.

the clerk: mr. lankford, no. mr. thune, no.

the clerk: mr. menendez, aye. the clerk: mr. crapo, no.

the clerk: mr. schumer, aye.

the clerk: ms. warren, aye.

the clerk: mr. sanders, no.

the clerk: mr. romney, aye.

the clerk: mr. hickenlooper, aye. the clerk: mr. tillis, aye.

the clerk: mrs. capito, no.

the clerk: ms. smith, aye.

the clerk: mr. tester, yea. -- aye. the clerk: mr. rubio, no.

the clerk: mr. grassley, no.

the clerk: mr. hawley, no.

the clerk: ms. ernst, no. the clerk: mr. warnock, aye. mr. cardin, aye.

the clerk: mr. blumenthal, aye.

the clerk: mr. ossoff, aye.

the clerk: mr. hoeven, no.

the clerk: mr. vance, no. mr. sullivan, no.