in brussels. to remind people the attack in brussels didn't happen on an airplane. it happened outside where passengers were gathering. so if we can address this curb-to-gate security, alleviate the slowdowns and the spots that make it more difficult for efficiency at the airport to get through security, this amendment can help do that. we can avoid danger to the public from those who wish to do our people hample the bill includes important certification reforms that will improve the processing of new aircraft designs and modifications at the f.a.a. this is important because we had a crop duster in colorado who was trying to get his plane certified. this is a spray plane. but what he found out is, first of all, the f.a.a. was taking a very, very long time to certify his crop duster, to give him the permission to use this plane to splay crops.

after they found his application, he ended up in a queue, a line behind united airlines, behind frontier airlines. so basically this crop duforter in southeastern kol alcohol a very small plane, into the passenger plai plane by any mea. he was put in line with a 747, a 767. that doesn't make any sense. we're able to dleaf in this bill. a couple years ago i requested the inspector general at the if a to look at what wases happening at the rocky mountain regional facility in denver. they pointed to a number of challenges that that region had in terms of its management, in terms of its process, certification, other areas. we were able to include the changes that the inspector general report identified in this legislation in the f.a.a. today. finally, the legislation makes key strides in the aviation industry by addressing unmanned aerial systems. we have a number of areas in colorado where we can test, certify, and of course the need is great, from agriculture to our ski resorts to wildfires.

think about what we can accomplish in the future with unmanned aerial systems. and so i just want to thank the leadership, thank senator thune, our colleague from south dakota, for the leadership that he provided. i thank the presiding officer for the work that the presiding officer has done to make this legislation a success, and with that, i urge support for the legislation and would conclude my remarks on the f.a.a. bill, asking members to support the bill. madam president, i have eight unanimous consent requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and minority leaders. i ask unanimous consent that these requests be agreed to and that these requests be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. a senator: thank you, i yield back my time. mr. thune: i want to compliment the senator from colorado for his active participation in shaping this bill and obviously he is a very

active member of our commerce committee, cares deeply about these issues and was very involved in the issues that he addressed in his remarks that were incorporated into this were systemly and purely a credit to his persistence and hard work and they do make this bill much stronger. and so i appreciate his good work in making that possible. i want to say, too, again what i mentioned earlier today. and that is that senator nelson and i, as we put this bill together, it was done in regular order. we had, i think, on the order of seven hearings, where we took testimony, tried to assemble the best ideas. we worked together with members of the committee, including the presiding officer, in shaping a bill that we brought to a markup and getting to the markup and through the markup, we adopted 57 amendments -- 57 amendments, 34 democrat amendments, 23

republican amendments, before it came to the floor. after coming to the floor last week we've had now 19 amendments that have been added. we've another 30 or thereabouts that have been cleared, if we could get, you know, objections withdrawn so that those amendments would get cleared. but we have some other amendments that we have members who would luke to get votes on, and i would ask unanimous consent, madam president, that the following a.m.s be called up and be reported by number:, sessions number 3591, paul number 3639 as modified, and rubio number 3722. further, that there be 45 minutes of debate concurrently on amendments equally divided between the two leaders or their designees, and that following the use or yielding back of time, the senate vote in relation to the amendments in the order listed, with a 60-affirmative vote threshold required for adoption of the amendments and that no second-degree amendments be in order prior to the votes. the presiding officer: is there objection i?

mrs. boxer: reserving the right to object -- the presiding officer: the senator from california. mrs. boxer: madam president, i so admire the managers of this i will b i really dovment as a former chairman, ranking member now, i know how hard this is. this is not a balanced request. i would just say, and i've spoken here on this safety of pilot fatigue so many times, i won't reiterate it here, but i know i feel strongly that i want to voavment i know others on our side do as well. i just don't think this is balanced. so sadly i will object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. mr. nelson: madam president, in the same spirit as the chairman of the committee, i ask unanimous consent that the following amendments be called up and reported by number: boxer 3489, markey 3467, and further that there be 45 minutes of debate to run concurrently on the amendments equally divided

in the usual form, and that the following of use or yielding back of time, the senate vote in relation to the amendments in the order listed with 60 affirmative vote threshold required for adoption of the amendments and that no second-degree amendments be in order prior to the votes. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. thune: madam president, reserving the right to object -- the presiding officer: the senator from south dakota. thune thiewnld say we have worked to get the senator from california's amendment a vote. we have tried to get the other amendment referenced by the senator from florida, senator markey's amendment, a vote. but we have members often our side who also want votes and the other side is objecting to those votes and so i object. the presiding officer: heard. objection is heard. mr. rubio: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from florida. mr. rubio: thank you. as you may have heard a moment

ago, one of the amendments that's being objected on our end is an amendment that i have filed. let me first describe the issue i'm trying to address. i am going to ask for unanimous consent for the newspaper article from the south florida "sun-sentinel" be entered into the record. i ask unanimous consent that an article dated "u.s. welfare flows to cuba" from october 1 of 2015, be entered into the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. rubio: so i'm going to not read the whole article but i am going to paraphrase from it. on the democratic amendments that have been proposed, the senator from california just made a presentation on travel issues and pilot hours and she referred to the fact that i've traveled extensively over the last year. it is an issue that i'm very sympathetic towards. perhaps we can work together to get her a vote on that amendment because i think that is a legitimate issue. let me talk about the one that i want to talk about. here's how the article begins. i talked about this yesterday.

let me back up and explain to people what we're facing. today if animmigrant enters the united states from another country, legally comes here on a green card, five-year rein deny circumstance they cannot receive federal benefits. if you immigrate to the united states from any country in the world with an immigrant visa, legally, not illegal immigration -- illegal immigrants do not qualify for federal benefits -- a legal immigrant to the united states does not qualify for any federal benefits. there is an exception in the law, however. that is, if you happen to be someone is that comes from cuba without a visa. there is a law called the cuban adjustment act. what when the act was passed during the cold war it was passed so when cubans came to the united states fleeing communist owe prerks they were immediately give j admission into the united states. if a cuban makes it to the shores of the united states, they become legally in this

country and a year and a day after they have arrived they are allowed to apply for a green card. but unlike any immigrant from any part of the world, they are allowed to receive federal benefits because they are automatically presumed to be refugees. that is a status by the way that i'm not trying to change in terms of the cuban adjustment act. i'mtope that being examined. but what i do want to discuss senior senator why should you automatically assume at this point that anyone that comes from cuba is a political refugee? and the reason why that now is in doubt is because many of the people that are coming from cuba supposedly as refugees seeking to flee oppression are traveling back to cuba, 15, 20, 30 times a year. are there political people being politically oppressed in cuba? absolutely. it is one of the reasons why i think the president's policies towards cuba have been misguided

because they refuse to see that even after this opening to cuba, the political situation on the island has deteriorated. it's gotten worse, not better. there are absolutely people from cuba that are coming here, as refugees. but we also cannot ignore the fact that many of the people coming from cuba no longer are coming here for political reasons, and the evidenced is that shortly after they arrive, they're going back to cuba, 15 20,, 30 times a year. you don't normally travel back to a place that you are fleeing from oppression, much less repeatedly over an extended period of time. and so as a result, we now have a law that basically says if you come from cuba, you are automatically entitled to a full platform of federal benefits. okay? here's how the article begins. "cuban immigrants are cashing in orn u.s. welfare and returning to the island making a mockery of the decades-old premise that they are refugees fleeing persecution at home.

cubans' unique access to food stamps, disablght money, and other welfare is meant to help them build new lives in america, yet these days it is helping some finance their lives on the communist island. america's open-ended generosity has grown into an entitled that exceeds $680 million a year and is exploited with ease, and there's no agency that tracks the scope of this abuse, but a "sun-sentinel" investigation found evidence suggesting it is widespread. fed-up floridians, where a lot of these cubans are moving to, are reporting their neighbors angz and their relatives for accepting government aid while shuttling back and forth to the island selling goods in cuba and leaving their benefit cards in the u.s. forkers to use while they are away. some do not even come back at all. the united states has continued to deposit welfare checks for as long as two years after the

recipients moved back to cuba for good. close quote. there is a shop keeper in high leah, florida, war lot of these folks are coming and moferg. he is a bar shaller, been in the us for three years. he said that recent immigrants on welfare talk of spending considerable time in cuba six months there, two months here. you come and go before the benefits expire, he said. the article goes on, it quotes, that there is a sense of entitlement that has become so ingrained that cubans are now routinely complaining to the local congressman about the challenge of accessing u.s. aid from cuba. what they are complaining about is they're coming into the office -- here's what an aide to a former congressman from miami said. this is his quote. "a family member would come into our office and say, another family member isn't receiving

his benefits. and we'd say, where is he? and they'd say, he is a in cuba. and he isn't coming back for six months. this is unreal. there are people coming into congressional offices complaining, we're having trouble getting access to our benefits. you ask them, well why? because the person is in cuba. you can't get access to his benefits in cuba. one woman told us that her grandmother and two great aunts came to florida, got approved for benefits, opened bank accounts and returned to cuba. month after month the women cashed their government checks. about $2,400 each time sending half to the women in cuba and, by the way, keeping the rest for themselves, a 50% commission. when a welfare woman questioned the cuban woman, she told her that her grandmother rue fused to come back, "with the money

you've been giving me, i bought a home and i'm really happy in cuba. " ibara went on to say that the cubans have a name for this aid meaning "the help." now, could you bang cubans are e u.s. and quickly grantinged permanent residency under the 1966 cuban adjustment act. they are automatically assumed to be refugees. without having to prove it. they are immediately eligible for welfare, food stamps, medicaid, and for supplemental social security or s.s.i. and also cash assistance for impoverished seniors and for disabled young people. but not all -- let's be frank, not all cubans receive government aid. if you come to the united states from cuba on a visa -- because there is a visa lottery and every year the government awards visas to people living in cuba. if you come to the united states

on a visa, you do not qualify touser these benefits. if you arrive on a raft or fly on an airplane to creek, gault guatemala, or mexico and cross the u.s. border, then you do qualify for these benefits i have just outlined so let's be frank. there are people coming from cuba that are fleeing persecution. but many are taking advantage of the easy money and then they're going back and forth from cuba. i'm going to give you some examples cited in this article. a public housing tenet in hialea, who was receiving food stamps and s.s.i. payments for a disabled son frequently traveled to cuba to sell food there, records showed. she admitted to a city housing investigator in 2012 that she makes $700 in two months just in the sales to cuba. $700 a month is a lot of money in cuba. how does this work? they take the food stamp card. they go to the grocery store. they load up a bag with canned

goods. they travel back to cuba. they just bought that food with your taxpayer money. they travel back to cuba with a duffel bag full of canned goods and they sell it in cuba for a profit. $700 over a two-month period. another man receiving food stamps admitted to state officials that he was living in cuba for much of the year 2015. a recent arrival with a chronic illness got medicaid coverage and then he turned to his attorney from miami to help him get s.s.i. as well. but the man was going back and forth to cuba so much that the attorney eventually dropped its case because it was just another benefit he was applying for. this, of course, concerns people who came to cuba as exiles and are now watching this happen. there's a doctor. his name is noel fernandez. he recalls what when his -- that when his family arrived here from cuba, that the u.s. government helped them a little bit when they emigrated here 20 yearsing a. they helped him to find work as a landscaper.

helped him to learn english and complete his medical studies. fernandez sees cuban immigrants collecting benefits and going back including three elderly patients who recently left the united states for good. they got medicaid, they got everything and they returned to cuba. i see people that said they're refugees from cuba and they return the next year. that's his quote. state officials in my home state of florida have received complaints about cubans collecting aid while repeatedly going to cuba or working as mules ferrying cash and goods, which is a common way of financing travel to the island. and how that works is people know you're traveling to cuba and they have relatives that they want to get money to or clothes to or whatever and so they pay you. they actually pay you. they give you money and they say, will you take this with you on your trip to cuba and deliver it to the people we're trying to get it to. that's why they call them a mule. well, from the money that you get paid to take these things back to cuba, that's how you pay your plane ticket. another way of paying for these

trips, by the way, is cheating. like other welfare recipients, some cubans work under the table or their put their assets in another name to appear poor enough to meet the program's income limits, according to records and interviews. some married couples qualify for more money if they are single. many of our welfare programs, they actually give you more money if you're not married because you don't have to combine your income. and so because they were married in cuba, they simply conceal the fact that they're married because the u.s. can't access those records. that's another way of cheating. now, accessing benefits from someone who's in cuba typically requires a u.s. bank account and a willing relative or friend stateside. by the way, that's just for now. because as part of this opening to cuba, the obama administration is going to make it easier for there to be banking transactions with cuba. so what we are facing here, my friends, is in a very short period of time, once banking become regularized with american

banks, they won't even need to rely on their relatives in order to get this stuff. all they're going to need is an a.t.m. or debit card or credit card secured to that account and you, the american taxpayer, will deposit the welfare checks, the s.s.i. into their bank account and then they will be conducting transactions or withdrawing the cash from cuba directly. so they won't even need the relatives to do it. but right now they still need that. food stamps and welfare are issued monthly to a debit-type card and s.s.i. payments are deposited into a bank account or on to a mastercard, which soon you will be able to use in cuba. then what you need is a joint account holder with a p.i.n. number who can withdraw the money and wire it to you in cuba. another option is just to entrust the money to a friend that's traveling to cuba. so roberto pizano of tampa, a political prisoner for 18 years in cuba, said he worked two jobs when he arrived in 1979 and he never accepted government help. but now he sees immigrants abusing the system. he says he has a family friend.

this family friend got disability money from the u.s. and with the disability money, he renovated his house in cuba. the "sun sentinel" found this man. his name is gill bear toe rena. they found him living in cuba. when they found him and interviewed him, he said he was no longer receiving disability. but pizano and another person familiar with the situation said the payments continued to be deposited into his u.s. bank account. here's another example that federal investigators found. in 2012, a complaint alleged that a 75-year-old woman had moved to that same city in cuba. two years earlier and that a relative was withdrawing her s.s.i. money from a bank account and sending it to her. now, luckily social security finally stopped the payments. but only after nearly $16,000 had been deposited into her account. here's another story of a recipient that went to cuba on

vacation and then stayed. leaving his debit card with a relative. social security continued his s.s.i. payment for another six months, $4,000, before finally an anonymous caller reported that he had gone back to cuba. another woman reportedly moved to cuba in 2010 and decide three years later while still receiving s.s.i. and food stam stamps, according to a 2014 tip to florida welfare fraud investigators. five cubans interviewed by the "sun sentinel" in shah van that said -- havana said they were aware of the assistance and knew of cubans who had gone to america and quickly started sending money back. two said they believed it was u.s. government aid, meaning this is now spreading through word of mouth. so you live in cuba, you know someone that left to the united states, they qualified for these benefits and they start coming back and bringing the money with them or sending it back to their relatives. word gets around. and that's why it's not a surprise that outside welfare

offices in hialea, florida, the "sun sentinel" found cuban immigrants who had arrived as recently as three days earlier already applying for benefits. and they said that family and friends are the ones that told them about the aid before they left for cuba. back in the 1960's when you came in, they told you the factory that was hiring, said nela adiz of miami, a former bailbonds woman who was born in cuba. now they tell you where the closest department of children and families office is so you can go and apply for benefits. another miami bail bonds woman, barbara pozo, said that many of her cuban clients, they talk openly about living in cuba and collecting monthly disability checks, courtesy of u.s. taxpayers. they just come here to pick up the money, pozo said. they pretend they're disabled. they pretend that they're crazy. s.s.i. payments for those who cannot work due to mental or physical disabilities go up to $733 a month for an individual.

most other new immigrants are ineligible until they become u.s. citizens, by the way. some cubans are trying to build a case for s.s.i. by claiming trauma from their life under an oppressive government or from the 0-mile cross -- 90-mile crossing to florida. but diaz, the former bonds woman, said she had heard cuban clients talk about qualifying. this is her quote. this is what she hears them saying to each other. tell them that you have emotional problems. how did you get these problems? well, trying to get here from cuba. end quote. here's the one that should really gall everyone. these are all bad stories. an individual collected disability while organizing missions to smuggle cubans to florida, including one that he launched from a house in the keys, federal prosecutors said. kahmein claimed that he rented the home to celebrate his birthday after receiving his government check.

casimedo martinez was receiving a monthly check for a mental disability but his mind was sound enough to launder more than a million dollars stolen from medicare. martinez was arrested at miami international airport after returning from a trip from cuba. by the way, while benefits are supposed to be suspended for recipients who leave the united states for more than 30 days, do you know how the government finds out whether you left for 30 days or not? it relies on people to self-report their absences. and federal audits have found widespread violations. so the only way you can find that someone's actually doing this is they have to call you and say, "hey, by the way, i'm now living in cuba and i'm still collecting my checks." well, that ain't going to happen. this is an outrage. listen, my parents came from cuba. i live in a community where cuban exiles are a plurality of the people who live there. so no one can say this is an anti-immigrant thing or a meanspirited thing. it is -- we have the support for this idea of every elected cuban-american member of the house.

i, myself, come from a cuban-american family. this is an outrage. it's happening right underneath our nose. who can be for this? who -- let me rephrase it. who can be against doing something about this? we are talking close to $700 million a year of american taxpay money that is being -- that could be spent right now to deal with the zika virus issue that we're facing, for example, and instead this money is being abused, it's being stolen. so you would think, wow, that's a commonsense thing, right? people here in the gallery, people at home, if anyone's actually watching c-span, you watch this, you say that's commonsense, right? that's commonsense. they're going to do something about it. i can't get a vote on an amendment. i cannot get the senate to vote on an amendment to stop this practice. here's the only thing i'm asking. i am asking that if you come from cuba, you have to prove that you are a refugee. prove to us. i'm not even saying we're not going to let you in. i'm just saying that if you come from cuba using the cuban

adjustment acts, prove that -- act, prove that you've been persecuted in cuba. that's not hard to do. you were in jail, you were beaten, you've got other people -- we know who the people are that are being persecuted. all we're saying is prove that you are a refugee and then you'll qualify for the benefits. because we help refugees. but apparently that's too much to ask. now, here's the thing. everybody here comes up to me and says, i'm for your amendment. i support what you're trying to do. well, great, why can't we vote on it? well, we can't vote on it because if we give you your amendment, then we have to give the other side their amendment. and let me just tell you, guys. this is why people are so sick of politics. i don't want to get too much into the weeds on this. suffice it to say, i've spent from april 13 of 2015 through very recently traveling all over this country on another endeav endeavor. and one of the things you hear from people -- they're just angry, they're just fed up. they think, you know, we elect -- no matter who we elect, who we vote for, who we send to washington, nothing changes, nothing ever happens. doesn't matter. you can vote for a republican,

you can vote for a democrat, you can vote for a vegetarian. it doesn't matter who you vote for. nothing happens. these people don't do anything. they're right. i've just come here today and laid this out. no one can argue this. no one can argue against what i just said. no one. i challenge any member of this senate to come here now. i'll give you the rest of the time i have apportioned to me and tell me why changing this is a bad idea. but i can't even get a vote on an amendment to change this. and the excuses are long. oh, we can't do it because we don't want to open the tax portion of the bill up. because then other people will want their amendments. this is crazy. this is nuts. we can't solve problems. we can't solve something as clear and simple as this. we can't even get a vote on it. a vote. you want to vote against what i'm proposing? vote against it. we can't even get a vote on an amendment like this. it makes no sense. and this is just -- i mean, it's not a small issue. we're talking $700 million. but this is not an issue of national coverage, it's not in the news every day, it's not

controversial, this is bipartisan. the chairman of the democratic national democratic committee, debbie wasser man-schultz, is a cosponsor of this bill in the house. but this is not partisan. it's not about getting anyone elected to anything. i'm not running for anything. this is about what's doing right. this is about being able to go back to my home community and say to people, this abuse has been addressed. but if i go home tonight or tomorrow to florida, when i go home, and i run into somebody at a grocery store, i can't explain to them with a straight face why the senate won't give me a vote on it because it makes no sense. if i came to you and said, they are stealing $700 million a year from you and here's a very simple way to stop it, you would say, let's do it. we've got to do it. they're saying we can't do it. and no one will tell you why we can't do it except some procedural internal senate thing. this is ridiculous. this is why people are angry. this is why people are so upset. this is why people have taken on this attitude that, get rid of

everyone. and i've got to tell you, it's hard to blame them after you see what's happening here now. this is a total, complete outrage. there's another amendment, by the way, being debated by senator sessions. it has to do -- it's another one of the amendments that was denied a vote. it has to do with the entry-exit tracking system. which basically means that when you come into the united states with a visa, you get a visa to visit the united states for 90 days as a tourist. you want to go to washington, you want to go to disney world, you want to go to new york city and you have 90 days to visit the united states. when you arrive, we check you in. but we never check you out. and so we never know when someone left. and as a result today, of the 12 million or 13 million or 14 million people that are here illegally, about 40% or some of them are people that overstay visa. they didn't cross the border illegally, they came on an airplane and they overstayed their visa. everyone says they are in favor of a system that tracks entries and exits so we can crack down on these overstay of visas.

everyone says they're in favor of it. in 2013, the senate passed a controversial immigration reform bill that i was a part of and we helped craft and an entry-exit tracking system was part of that bill. everyo, democrat, republican, conservative, everyone says they're in favor of doing that but you can't get a vote on it. makes no -- again, makes no sense. this place can't solve anything. and this is ridiculous. and so what happens when you don't solve things for a long time? the problems stack up. the problems stack up. and people lose confidence. people lose faith. now, look, i understand this process. i know that everyone is not always going to get everything. you're not going to achieve everything you want when you get involved in these issues. but these are common sense issues. and entry-exit tracking system, of course that makes sense. by the way, you have to do that on the f.a.a. bill. you have to. because that has to do with airports where most of the entry-exits are happening. this issue is drafted to this bill because this bill has a

piece of it that deals with the tax code and the finance. a moment ago the chairman said we had -- he did. they had an open amendment process on the f.a.a. bill. but there's a finance component to this bill that was not offered till it got here. and that's what my amendment is drafted so i couldn't have offered this in a committee. but i just think, you know, people come to washington. they watch this process. they hear me explain this thing. they're wondering there has to be a catch, right? what is the other side of the argument this there is no other side to the argument. there is none. there is none. why should -- why should you, the people watching, the people here, why should anybody, why should the american taxpayer be giving money to people to build houses in another country that don't live here? and that's what's happening right underneath our nose. you can't forget about passing it. you can't even get a vote on it. for reasons no one can explain. and so you want to know why people are upset and frustrated at the political process? this is just a small and important example of why people are so frustrated. i hope this will change.

i hope it will change. i mean, i hope it will change on this bill because i don't think you can explain with a straight face why something like this can't pass. or why something like this can't even get a vote on it. this makes absolutely no sense. but this is what's happening here every single day on a routine basis and -- i mean here, i mean here in washington. the result is people start to scratch their heads and say it doesn't matter who we elect. nothing changes. and that explains a lot about the frustrations that are going on in this country. so i hope that will change. i do want to talk about another topic briefly. and it is also related to cuba. but on a much different note. and it has to do with the bay of pigs which is something that happened a while back. today coming up on the 17th l mark the anniversary of a significant event in history. it's an event that many in our government over the years have been eager to forget and is often cited as a blemish on our history. but i beg to differ in some ways. the result wasn't what we wanted

but i think we have a lot to be proud of. and i think it's becoming increasingly important to remember. 55 years ago this sunday on the 17th of april in 1961, there were 1,500 brave volunteers who embarked upon a mission to liberate cuba if fidel castro's oppressive grip. this force is made up primarily of cuban exiles. they were a diverse group from all backgrounds within cuban society. they knew they would be badly outnumbered and that they would face extraordinary odds. and yet these men stormed the beaches at the bay of pigs. and they did it for at the time was their country, cuba. they did it for their families. they did it for freedom itself. over the next four days, nearly 100 members o, the brigade 2506, they lost their lives, nearly a hundred members. included in that number, by the way, were four american pief lots -- pilots and five others who were executed.

the majority were captured and imprisoned for many months and years and in humane conditions. though that invasion failed, the bay of pigs invasion, it was a triumph of courage for the brairveg cuban exiles -- owe brave cuban exiles and searches today as a reminder of the era where the united states government embraced america's role as the watchman on the walls of freedom. since taking power those many years ago, the anti-american castro regime has never relented in its attempts to undermine its security and suppress its own people. more than one million cubans have voted with their feet fleeing the island in search of political freedom or better economic conditions. we just discussed that a moment ago. and often coming here to the united states. many of these refugees are my neighbors and they're my friends and they're my constituents. my own parents left cuba several years before castro took over but their lives were nonetheless marred by his rule as well. the relationships with family

and friends and access to their homeland were abruptly severed. for the nearly 1500 cuban exiles that made up the assault brigade 2506, fidel castro was not the leader of their country. he was what he's always been, a thief and an imposter. they knew liberty was a god given right and they needed to do all in their power to reclaim it. their stories says as much about their own resilience as it does about america. the very building i stand in and the proud body i am a member of would not exist were it not for men like them over 150 years before. america's declaration of independence says of man kind's inalienable rights that, quote, whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it and to institute a new government. end quote. those who undertook the bay of pigs invasion fought for their

country, not against it. their cause was a humanitarian cause, a noble cause, in many ways an american cause. many of those who were captured and eventually released next yiel to the united states, they came here with nothing, not a penny. in many cases with no english skills. this he went to work and embraced america's blessings but they never forget their homeland. some made their life's work, made it their life's work to promote the cause of a free cuba. others went to work on a different endeavor, to provide for their families, but dedicated countless hours as faithful volunteers of the cause. many of them, many of these former members of the brigade 2506 would take up arms for the united states, serving in our armed forces with the same bravery and distinction they showed at the bay of pigs and in doing so, they served as teachers to an entire community. today in miami, for example, brigade 2506 monument and mao seeup now exists as much to commemorate these heroes as they

do to educate others. far from being forgotten, the example of these brave men has inspired others to carry on their work. their legacy lives and it lives on among those of us who follow in their footsteps by making their cause of a free cuba our cause. today the spirit of those who paid the ultimate price is alive and well in the bra grade's veterans -- bra grade's veterans -- bring grade's veterans association. their spirit is also alive inside of cuba represented by all those who stand up to the repressive regime and its beatings, detentions and suppressions of speech. a strong dissident movement within the island refuses to be silenced, demanding change and the right of every human being to be free. sadly this administration has betrayed that spirit of dissension by treating the castro government as if it were democratically elected. the president's actions have only motivated a dictatorship to increase in its very nature. but as long as the spirit of the

brigade lives on the dream of a free cuba will never die. following the bay of pigs invasion in december 1962, president kennedy delivered a speech in miami honoring those would fought and accepting an honor from them in return. he accepted the flag of their brigade. president kennedy said, quote, "i can assure you that this flag will be returned to this brigade in a free havana." that assurance was not made by a name but by a nation. it came with no expiration date. i believe we as americans owe it to the fear lses men who fought at the -- fearless men who fought at the bay of pirgs to ensure their flag that last touched the shore the of cuba 55 years ago this week is one day returned to a free havana and that everything that flag represents, freedom, sacrifice, the dreams of the cuban people remains the cause of the united states. so to the veterans of assault

brigade 2506, thank you for your service and god bless you. madam president, i yield the floor. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from alabama. mr. sessions: i thank senator rubio for his comments and his heartfelt expressions here. it's important and his amendment, his very -- is very common sensical. it deals with a very real abuse that i know he and many cuban americans today understand to be an abuse and want to see ended. this would be a good opportunity for us to pass it and i understand senator rubio's frustrations that we seem to be unable to fix problems around this body. and that's my feeling this afternoon, too. this frustration that we're not able to finally take action on things like the entry-exit visa system and complete it like we

promised to do for years, and we get very, very close but we don't get there. senator rubio, thank you for your excellent leadership on this issue and your support for the amendment that i have worked on. i think it's very reasonable and appropriate amendment and gives plenty of opportunity for us to carry out the necessary program in a reasonable way. the amendment i submitted will ensure the implementation of the statutorily required biometric exit system. it's been in law for a long time. first set in law in 1996, 20 years ago. we've had at least eight or more times where we've mandated this legislation. the first one was in 1996. these requirements were ignored basically. they were eventually modified and then the terrorist acts of 2011 -- excuse me, september 11,

2001 occurred. congress responded to that by demanding the government implement this entry-exit system. when we passed the patriot act to provide greater security for america. it stated that an entry and exit data system should be fully implemented for airports, seaports, land border ports of entry. quote, "with all deliberate speed and as expeditiously as practical." that was in 2001. now, if you remember, what the -- what happened after 9/11, we had a nine commission. -- a 9/11 commission. there was a bipartisan commission. that commission was charged with a serious responsibility of analyzing our immigration system and analyzing our safety system and our intelligence system and all kinds of problems that led us -- made us more vulnerable than we need to be. and one of their recommendations

was that you have a system when you come into america on a visa that you clock yourself in like many workplaces have and you clock yourself out when you leave the country, and your time on your visa expires. and so then the united states would know who had come and who had entered and who had exited. we also know, of course, if you recall back to that day, a number of the hijackers, the 9/11 attackers, killed 3,000 americans. they came on visas lawfully. and they overstayed, several of them, the visas that they had. so this was the response. and we have the capability of doing this. we've had the capability for many years, and it's just not happened. not happened. ten years after 2001, the 9/11

attack, the 9/11 commission met again. and the purpose of their meeting was to ascertain how much of what they had recommended had actually been accomplished by the united states government. and one of the very first things they noted was the failure to complete the exit system. so this is why this becomes such a big issue. in 202, we passed an -- in 2002, we passed an act that moved forward the bill. it required the government to install biometric readers and scanners at all ports of entry of the united states. and in fact we have a biometric entry system where you come and put your fingerprints on a screen and it reads them, but oddly we don't have the exit

system. how is it so much harder to have a system that allow you to document your exit than it is to document your entry? so this is a serious problem. subsequently and consistent with the recommendations of the 9/11 commission, congress passed the intelligence reform act of 2004. it mandated the entry-exit system be complete and be biometricically based. so that's different from biographically. biographically you give your social security number, name and they check if somebody has a warrant out for your arrest or if you should be on a no fly zone or connected with terrorism or organized crime or drug dealing gangs or whatever is in the indices. well, you can just give a false name. that's not a very secure system at all. what the 9/11 commission concluded was, correctly, that you should -- if you used a

biometric system where they read your fingerprints, somebody couldn't come in and say they're john jones and they're really ralph smith who's got a warrant out for their arrest for terrorism somewhere. that's the kind of thing that this system was design and set up to do and can be done. so despite the relatively successful complementation of a biometric entry system, the department has largely failed to implement the requirements. to date, the department of homeland security has only implemented a handful of pilot programs. now, it's not hard to be done, and they've dragged -- they've been dragging their feet for years now. but there's promising developments on this system. the consolidated appropriations act of 2016 created a dedicated source of money with the

implementation of the biometric exit. it's been estimated this bill will result in approximately $1 billion in funds available solely for the implementation of the biometric exit system that's already in law required to be a part of our legal and immigration system. yet even with this source of funding, hurdles remain to implement the system. my amendment will remove one of the biggest remaining hurdles. it simply states that no funds from this f.a.a. bill, this federal aviation administration bill that funds airports and runways and safety systems and all of those systems there, can beexpended -- quote -- "for the physical modification of any of these existing facilities that is a port of entry or construction of a new air navigation facility intended to be a port of entry unless the

secretary of of homeland security certifies that the owner or sponsor of the facility has agreed to a plan that guarantees the implementation and installation of a biometric exit system at such facility and not later than two years after the date of the enactment of the act." in other words, it gives them two years, but you have to reach an agreement to actually take steps to fix this problem and it gives you two years to make sure it's complete. so i've modified my amendment in an amendment to address some concerns that were raised by the airlines by explicitly referring to the $1 billion appropriated for this system. we received positive feedback from the customs and border patrol officers who have to deal with this every day, and they support this plan. and my amendment has been endorsed by the border patrol

union. they know this is a loophole in our system, a gaping hole in our security, and they want to see it completed, and it's long overdue. so the amendment allows the u.s. customs and border protection officers and each airport that serves as a port of entry to create a solution that works specifically for the needs of the c.b.p. and the limitations of each individual airport. it does require, however, that the parties agree to a plan that guarantees the system will be installed and implemented within two years because the suggestions we've had in response of what kind of language critics and objectors would like to see, it never has an end date. it says, well, you begin a pilot project or you can do this, that, and the other, but it never gives a date when it should actually be completed.

colleagues, this system can be made to work. it could be implemented in every airport in six months, in my opinion. we've got companies that have this kind of system that are used all over the place. in disneyland you use a fingerprint system. it's on our cell phones. this is the kind of thing that's no problem really to make happen, but we lack will and a determine inauguration -- and a determination see it. somehow it never gets completed. in fact, homeland security, airports, and airlines have had a generous time already to do this. it could be done quickly. one manufacturer said we should host a special products date.

they said, you should just have a day out here. people think it can't be done. have a day and ask all the manufacturers around the country to bring forth their equipment that's being used in businesses and places all over the country, nuclear plants, and this -- and just come in here and set them up and let's see what you we can do with it. one company says you don't even have to touch a screen. you can wave your hand in front of the screen and -- you can wave your hand in front of the screen and it will read your prints. so these are proven products. the prices are low and falling and at the most basic level, if apple and samsung can put it on their iphones, we can certainly do it at the airports. and they say, well, testimony take a lost space. i.t. not going to take a lot of space. police officers have these kind of fingerprint reading systems in their automobiles.

they arrest somebody for a crime, they want to know if they've got warrants for their arrest someplace around the kurntion they ask them to put their hand on the screen. it reads it. it runs against the national crime information center. bingo, he's got a warrant for robbery, and they hold them and not release them. they can woo, with larger airports with international terminals and install physical equipment at their international departure gates. c.b.p., the customs border patrol can work with smaller airports and deploy even handheld systems similar to the ones in cars at the gates that handle international flights. ultimately, all that passengers exiting the united states need to do is place their hands on a simple screen or with some devices wave their hands on it and it will biometrically

identify the passenger as truly the one on the flight documents that's exiting the united states. you can come in with a false document. if you are a terrorist, they work on these things all the time. terrorists use false identification. we know there are systems out there making them by the thousands and 10,000's. but if your fingerprint doesn't match the fingerprint of the person whose name you're using and it turns out to match somebody that's been identified as on a terrorist watch list, then you can stop it and create safety. if a person puts out their hand and there is a hit because the person boarding the plane is son a no-fly list, the passenger can be denied boarding or removed from the plane before they take off and remove their baggage from the plane before they take

off. importantly, the united states have a unified produced list of people that deported when their visa says they should depart. by the way, colleagues, several years ago the congressional budget office found that 40% plus of people illegally in america came by visa. they came legally. they just did not return. and they said that number is increasing and i believe it's increasing rather rapidly. we're going to see more of it in the future. if you don't have a system to identify people who overstayed their lawful entry, then you do not have a lawful system of immigration. it's just that simple. so for a host of reasons, this

system should be based on fingerprints. secretary of homeland security, secretary ridge, former governor of pennsylvania, set ouch up this system way back there. when i talked to him about it i told him as a former prosecutor that it needs tock based on the -- needed to be based on the fingerprint system. there were some that had other ideas about t look at your eye and face and these things technically can be done. but they can't run a check against somebody who committed murder somewhere and has got a warrant out for their arrest and they're fleeing the united states because all you have in our basic law enforcement system is crime data and people who are wanted for criminal activity. you need to use the fingerprint. it's proven. it's worked. it's used in every criminal justice system in the united states. and when he left office after

going round and round about this subject, secretary ridge said, i have one bit of advice for my successors. that is, use the fingerprint. and i believe he was totally correct in that and still remains the only real system that will work. so let us also be aware that numerous countries across the world including new zealand, singapore, hong kong has been using biometric systems for years. this is something nothing. others do it and we can do it, too. ending this failure has bipartisan support. my subcommittee, the subcommittee on immigration in the national interest, held a hearing on january 20 of this year entitled -- pretty good title i thought -- ytion why is the biometric exit track being system still not in place?" pretty good question.

well, during the hearing we had -- we got promises from government officials but no commitment that they would actually complete the system. oh, well we're doing pilot projects and we're considering this and we're working on it. they've been working on it for 20 years. and we had our members that were there, all the democratic members -- the three that were at that subcommittee hearing all said they favored this. there's no real opposition to it. just a few weeks later, after the hearing, secretary johnson of homeland security made public statement directing d.h.s. to begin implementation of the system at our airports by 2018 to begin implementation. when? 2018. no promise they would be completed. no assurance that they were

going to make the system a reality. so this is at least an acknowledgment that it's needed. bur we need a completion date. it's these kind of lulling comments that we've had for years that have resulted in no action. if congress would like to know -- if people in the senate would like to know why the american people are not happy with the performance of congress, this is a very good example. congress promises to fix a problem, even claims we voted for and even claimed we passed laws to fix a problem, and then it sits by while nothing happens and two decades go by. why? well, the special interests speak up. we've got lobbyists sending out letters saying, oppose the sessions' amendment.

it's time for us to represent the national interest, time for the special interest is over on this subject. congress has spoken repeatedly. the american people are getting tired of this. i'm getting tired of this. who runs this place? elected representatives or some high-paid lobbyists somewhere? they've been dragging out, they've been fighting this tenaciously with every effort they've had for years, and it's not happened. and america is at risk for it. airports and airlines, they're happy to get federal assistance whenever they can. they better be trying to cooperate, macing their airlines -- making their airlines even safer than it is today. it is time to fulfill the promise and comirmt we made -- and commitment we made to the american people. how much longer can this go on? we promised the american people a system that will did he demony

improve our national security. we voted for it time and again. we have bipartisan support for it. if this bill -- if we could get an amendment on this -- a vote on this amendment, we'd see a huge bipartisan majority for it. i don't know who would vote against t but we don't get the vote. and it doesn't happen. and years go by. this says two years you've got to get this thing done and i believe it's perfectly reasonable. indeed, it is should not take two years. as note the -- as noted by the former commissioner on the 9/11 economies, this is the 9/11 commission, "without exit tracking, our government does not know when a foreign visitor admitted to the united states on a temporary basis has overstayed his or her admission. had this system been in place on

9/11, we would have had a better chance of detecting the plotters before they struck." close so that's why it's important. we've long known since visa overstays pose a serious national security risk. a number of the hijackers on september 11th overstayed their visas. the number of visa overstayers complicated in terrorism since that day is -- implicated in terrorism since that day is certainly a significant number. a new poll indicates that 3-4 americans not only wants the obama administration to find those aliens who overstayed their visas but also to deport them. why not? you come here for a limited period of time. we have a law that says you can stay for this amount of time. it's not that hard to get a visa to the united states. but shouldn't you leave when your visa is up? do you just get to stay here? and take a job perhaps for an

american -- from an unemployed american citizen? the same poll indicates that 68% of americans consider visa overstays as a -- quote -- "serious national security ris risk." and 31% who consider visa overstays as very serious national security risk. and there's no doubt as to why. the risks to our national security are too high for us to maintain the status quo. we must fulfill this promise. we must do everything we can to implement the system. i hope some way, some how before this bill goes to final passage dealing with airports and public safety issues that we fix this problem. why not? i don't know a single person that opposes it. but we couldn't get the bill -- the amendment up, couldn't make it pending. the democrats objected to it. and now we have an objection to

having a vote on it before final passage of the legislation. so i'll just -- i -- i'm frustrated about it. i've been pushing this for years. even the gang of eight bill had it in there. so this is not something that i think is in any way unreasonable. it's time to bring it to a conclusion. i urge my colleagues, let's figure out a way to make this happen. i appreciate senator thune managing the bill. he's definitely for it and wants to see it happen. but right now we've got objections from the democratic side and we don't seem to be able to get it through. so i would urge my colleagues to reevaluate and approve passage of this bill that should have virtually unanimous support in the senate. mr. president, i would yield the floor and note that the -- that there's an absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call: