monument or if local people should have more input on how the neighborhood should be managed is how they look at it. >> host: for those in utah then, who are the main supporters of this decision? >> guest: the entire utah congressional delegation, they're all republican senators, congressmen, the utah governor, some of the local council. they all supported it. people who don't support it, environmental groups, many of the local groups, native american tribes, outdoor recreation folks all opposed it strongly. >> host: in fact, the salt lake tribune has a sub-story about those who reacted to it. five american indian tribes that were mad over the shrinking, they claim they declared war on us. >> guest: yeah. there's going to be a lawsuit filed by five of the tribes who are banding together to file a lawsuit. and it's going to be called navajo nation v. trump, so it is pretty blatantly the tribes feel like the federal government and their sovereign tribes are --

>> and we'll leave this washington journal segment to return to live coverage of the u.s. senate. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: i ask that the calling of the quorum be suspended. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. grassley: mr. president, i want to make a few brief remarks regarding the introduction of the security enforcement and compassion united and reform efforts. and we have selected the acronym "secure" for this piece of legislation that we're introducing today. this bill promotes and protects the interest of the american people in a lawful immigration system and provides a fair and equitable solution on deferred action for childhood arrivals. and everybody in the senate knows that by the acronym daca.

it's the product of several months of hard work between this senator and senators cornyn, graham, tillis, lankford, perdue, and cotton. and i think before the day's out and the senate closes down hiewl hear from -- you'll hear from almost all those folks on their approach to this legislation and their support for it. before i discuss what the bill does, i want to explain the process used to this point. on september 5, 2017, attorney general sessions announced that president trump had decided to rescind former president obama's unlawful executive amnesty program. because almost 700,000 young

people relied on president obama's false promise, the trump administration called upon congress to do what the president doesn't have the legal authority to do, to find the only real type of long-term solution to this issue. and obviously we're here because that is a legislative solution and not something that the executive branch thinks up and tries to put in place. starting in september, i've held multiple meetings with senators cornyn, graham, tillis, lankford, perdue, and cotton to determine how best to fix daca. our aim was to find a solution that not only is fair for daca recipients, but also promotes the interest of the american people. the immigration policies of the

previous administration carry consequences that weren't always in our best interest. for example, president obama allowed thousands of people to illegally cross our borders and to stay in our country, including dangerous gang members, sex offenders, and violent criminals. so, robust border security is crucial to bring integrity back to our nation's immigration enforcement. the enforcement policies of the previous administration enabled dangerous unauthorized criminals, individuals like kate steinle's killer to have free reign in our country, risking the safety of innocent americans. the flagrant disregard of

so-called sanctuary jurisdictions unfairly takes tax dollars from hardworking americans only to ignore the rule of law and their own people's public safety. in crafting our bill we also considered the inherent unfairness in our nation's immigration court and asylum adjudication system and how hundreds of thousands of aliens wait in the backlogs for years at a time. that's wrong. it hurts the people who are stuck in their backlog, and it's unfair to ask the american people and legal immigrants to bear the burden of supporting these people while they wait. and finally, thanks to the

leadership of senators graham, perdue, and cotton, we discussed in our small group of senators the need for a merit-based immigration system, one where we bring people to this country based on what they can contribute and not simply because they have some attenuated family relationship to a legal immigrant who's already here. so after having these discussions and after meeting with the president to get his input and his support, we've come up with a plan. this plan is fair to all parties. it's pro-american, and it's a solution to daca. our plan, as i said, by the acronym, secure act of 2017, provides a solution to all of

the issues we discussed. first, building off of the hard work and leadership of senator cornyn, we're putting days of porous uncontrolled borders behind us. we're doing this by mandating the construction of tactical and technological infrastructure at the border. we're also beefing up our law enforcement and judicial resources, and we're putting more boots on the ground in the border states so that we can better apprehend and prosecute those who enter our country illegally. our plan takes meaningful steps to end the lawlessness and tragedies at the hands of dangerous criminal aliens throughout our country. we do this by cracking down on sanctuary cities, ending the misguided catch and release

policies of the previous administration, and finally taking real steps to address intentional visa overstays. in recognition of the many americans who have lost their lives to criminal aliens, we included kate's law, named after the person murdered by a criminal felon who came back into our country five times, kate steinle. so kate's law. this legislation enhances penalties for repeat legal border crossers and extends the inaccessibility and expedited removal of terrorists, gang members, aggravated felons, and drunk drivers. we also provide a fix to the

disastrous decision so the government doesn't keep releasing dangerous criminals on to our streets just because their home country's refusal to take responsibility. our bill takes steps to eliminate many of the pull factors that encourage people to emigrate illegally. we do this by permanently authorizing the e-verify program and providing immunity and other incentives to encourage small business to participate in that e-verify program. we also take meaningful steps to reduce immigration court on asylum adjudication backlogs by hiring more judges and personnel, limiting the number of continuances an immigrant can

receive, and imposing new safeguards to combat well-documented fraud and abuse. again, thanks to the leadership and advocacy of senators graham, perdue, and cotton, our bill eliminates the phenomenon known as chain migration. from the day this bill becomes law, immigrants will only be able to bring their spouses and minor children into the country. this bipartisan, pro-american worker reform which the president strongly supports is an important first step towards creating the merit-based economically productive immigration system that both democrats and republicans want. finally, and most importantly, we provide a bipartisan solution to protect undocumented young

people brought to the united states as children by adopting a bill -- i'll give you the title. it goes by the acro ning, -- acronym bridge, b-r-i-d-ge. senator durbin called it an opportunity for supporters and critics of daca to come together and address a compelling humanitarian issue on a bipartisan basis. end of quote. we agree with senator durbin. the bridge act is supported by senators graham, durbin, gillibrand, heller, murkowski, feinstein, nelson, flake, schumer, and harris. it would provide relief from deportation and work authorization to daca recipients, allowing them to

continue to fulfill their dreams, and they will continue to contribute to our economy. as you can see, mr. president, our plan has fair, bipartisan, and serious provisions. by listening to colleagues and adopting solutions both sides can agree on, we're providing a real solution to the immigration issues our country is facing. our plan predicts the daca kids -- protects the daca kids, cracks down on criminal aliens, and provides real reform to our nation's immigration system that benefit the american people, and it does so through the proper legislative process. in other words, a constitutional way unlike a previous president tried to do this, provides

greater certainty for americans and immigrants alike. apparently it's also supported by the president. that's all the more reason to pass this bill and fulfill our promises to the american people and the daca recipients. again, i want to thank the hard work of senators cornyn, graham, tillis, lankford, perdue and cotton and their staffs for developing a solution. i'm looking forward to considering this measure in the new year and seeing president trump sign it into law, as he asked us to do. i see two of my colleagues, senator lankford and senator tillis is here. i'm giving up the floor if you would like to speak. thank you very much, mr. president. i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from north carolina. mr. tillis: thank you, mr. president. i also want to thank chairman

grassley for his leadership on this issue and his willingness to sit down and talk to a diverse group of people to talk about a problem that we must solve. senator grassley did such a good job of describing some of the technical aspects of the secure act and the bridge act and other legislation that actually came together to create the secure act. i want to back up and talk a little bit about what we're actually trying to do here. there are two key components to this bill and to efforts that have gone before the point that we've introduced this bill that i think are very important. the first one is the daca program, the deferred action for childhood arieftion. it was -- arrivals. it was implemented by president obama. what president obama sought to do was to provide some certainty for jiang adults -- for young adults and children who were brought across the border through the decisions of their

parents or guardian, to cross the border illegally. today they are still protected because they are still protected under daca, but the president announced on september 5 that on march 5 that program would end. now you can imagine that there are hundreds of thousands of young men and women that are uncertain about their future status in this country. it's a problem that we need to solve. the other side of the equation is also equally important to me and to a number of people in this body, and it has to do with our border security and interior enforcement. back in late winter i spent a week down on the southern border, i went to the rio grande center and to the west texas center and i spoke to the land port that hundreds of thousands of people cross every day and we talked about things they need to better secure the border.

there are two debates in congress and i don't embrace either of the two extremes. there's one extreme that says build a big, beautiful wall that is 2,000 miles long. it is impractical and not necessary. there is the other extreme that says we don't need borders, we need bridges. that is not practical and unsafe. we need a -- we need to have an orderly way to have someone come to the country and work and visit the united states and return back in a legal fashion. the other thing that we have to look at in border security that is often overlooked is the humanitarian crisis with an unsecure border. one of the numbers that stuck with me and there were so many when we were down with border security -- actually there are two numbers. one is the most heartbreaking. over a 10-year period 10,000 people have died crossing the

border unsuccessfully. 10,000 bodies have been recovered as a result of crossing the border and not finding their way to a safe place. about 1,000 were children. unless we know who is trying to cross, we can't protect them, even if it means we're going to take them into custody and deport them, at least they will be alive. i had another discussion with border security agents down at one of the big land ports where people cross every day. i'm not going to get into a lot of the details except to say they confiscated about 400,000 doses of methamphetamine in this one land port. by most estimates it's only a minor percentage of all the illegal drugs crossing the border. we obviously need more people, technology, and infrastructure to be table to capture people that are crossing the border through various trucks and cars.

they are finding ways to hide these drugs that are poisoning our youth and people of all ages. there's a reason for border security and a reason to invest in technology and infrastructure and there's a reason to have a protective discussion -- productive discussion on how to have a sustainable solution to have the young adults who came to this country through the decisions of their adult guardians. that is what the secure act is setting forth. we're trying to get a productive discussion that a balanced bill provides a sustainable solution for the daca population and get it done before march 5. now, there are some people that want to, i think, play a little bit of brinksmanship because they have something set in their mind of how they want the bill to look.

there are some things where there is timing, maybe a year-end budget to get it done, that doesn't produce a bipartisan outcome. those types of bills rs those tops -- those types of bills and sort of gotcha actions are the type of bills that someone will want to appeal or revise. we want a solution for the daca population for the rest of their lives. i think in the bridge act -- the provisions of the bridge act that are now in the succeed act do that. i also want to thank senator lankford. we followed another bill -- we have a lot of acronyms -- sometimes they say we're full of other things. but they are full of acronyms. but the succeed act i think a lot of the things in that will be considered to get a bill to the president's desk. the bill we sponsor is succeed. it's a solution for undocumented

children through careers, employment, education and defending our nation. it is like the bridge act. we know something about the daca population that is oftentimes overlooked. it's a great group of people. a little bit less than two million. many of them are working hard, going to school, serving in our military had they deserve an opportunity to provide a way to be able to recognize that's legally present in this country. that's what i think we'll accomplish can the -- with the secure act. what i hope my democratic colleagues will do, those who endorse the bridge act, and there are many of them. senator grassley ran through the list. i won't do it again. let's sit down and solve this problem. let's accept that there are people at the far left that will stand on one issue at the expense of letting march 5 pass and have the daca population at risk. let's tell people at the far right who want nothing less than

full deportation that is not going to happen. let's let people in the center who want to come up with a sustainable and compassionate solution that -- provide a solution for this population. i thank my colleagues who have worked together in the working group that chairman grassley has led are committed to working with democrats to come up with a reasonable solution. i know that i am. i know my colleague senator lankford are, and everybody will recognize at the end of the day this is for our nation's are security and for the security and the senator of the daca -- certainty of the daca population. if we accomplish those two goals, i think we will be very successful and we can start building on the dialogue for so many other things that we need to talk about when it comes to interior enforcement and immigration reform. with that, mr. president, i yield the floor.

mr. lankford: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from oklahoma. mr. lankford: mr. president, i'm delighted to be here with several other members to talk about the issue of immigration. this has become a very contentious issue that as soon as you say the words immigration, there's a whole group of individuals who scream amnesty, there's another group that screams that thugs are taking grandmothers out of their homes and we lose the policy issues that are in place. there are obvious problems with immigration. we have not taken those obvious issues on in decades. they need to be resolved, and every year that they are not resolved, this issue gets harder and more complicated. we should address the issue of immigration. now, for years the conversation's been out there and for years it remains unresolved. i would challenge this body in the next three months, let's resolve some of the big issues

of immigration. almost four years ago now i was in central america with a group of other senators and house members. we were meeting with central american leaders and we were meeting to talk about immigration and some of those individuals coming to the united states illegally and asking what do they do for immigration. ultimate many countries in the conversation -- multiple countries were talking about how they were increasing their border requirements at their borders, how they were managing had their workforce in their country and how individuals from other central america countries were traveling to their countries and changing the job and pay structure. we somehow get this belief that the immigration issue is only an american issue. every country in the world deals with immigration because every country in the world has the right and the responsibility to know who is in their country, are they citizens, are they noncitizens? i should have the ability in my

country to know who is coming as a guest and to say yes or no. for some reason that becomes lost in this conversation. when we fly anywhere else in the world we have a visa or passport because when we enter that country that country requires it because that you country, when we land, wants to know whose in their -- who is in their country and where they are. that seems normal to us when we talk about travel but for some reason that gets lost when we talk about immigration. it should be normal that we should know who is in the country and that we know where they are and when they are leaving. after the 9/11 commission finished, they challenged our nation to resolve one of the issues of immigration that sat out there that is still unresolved, it's entry-exit visas. why can't we know when someone is here under a legal visa we don't know when they leave.

that is still unresolved. year after year when i talk to homeland security, year after year they said we're doing a pilot project, we're close. year after year that's unresolved. the vast majority of people in this country illegal didn't cross the border illegally, they came with a visa, overstayed it, and never left. we never ask the question, whose here, who is not here and where do the connections come from. i would like to find a way to establish a group of foundation al issues and find common ground. we will have disagreement in this body but we should find common ground on immigration issues that we can look at and go, that's a reasonable way to do it. probably every member of the body would do it a little different and have a different set of preferences, you but we should agree that it should be done and there are areas of common ground to do it. quite frankly, the president of the united states gave us quite

a gift about three and a half months ago when he said to the daca program that it should be a legislative issue. i'm not going to renew that anymore on an administrative issue, that should be done in congress. for the first time in a long time congress has a deadline to deal with immigration. that's a very good gift because this congress has punted the immigration issue year after year after year after year without a deadline to get it resolved. now we do. that deadline is in early march. i suggest to this body, let's get if resolved. let's find an area where we can find common ground in this area. immigration courts right now have over half a million cases backlogged and pending, half a million. currently if you're going to hire a new judge to be able to be in the immigration courts, it will take 742 days to hire one immigration judge. that's not right. that's ridiculous. we should be able to get that resolved to be able to add new judges to our immigration courts

and to be able to help deal with the backlog of over a half million people. the e-verify system has been renewed in a bipartisan way year after year. let's take it from a temporary program which it is now, which some don't know it is temporary program. let's let's move it from a temporary program to a permanent program and make the tweaks and changes that are needed, whether it's be able to move the een verify into a hiring system, to encourage individuals in their hiring for more companies to be able to use it, for it to be a faster system that's more reliable. at times it can take up to six months to be able to get a final answer from e-verify. again, that's absurd. that's a fixable issue we should be able to do. we should been to resolve the issue of chain ply graition. -- chain migration. we somehow believe it's existed forever. it's not. it's only been around since 1965. prior to 1965, our immigration issues were tighter than they are now. but now it has formed this

system where you can add initially nuclear family and then as you gain citizenship, you can add parents. you can eventually add siblings. you can add other individuals and it continues to accelerate. i'm also frustrated when i hear people talk about our legal immigration system in the united states and say we should be more open. we admit a million people a year through legal immigration, a million a year. we're a very open country to legal immigration. we need to be more precise. we need to base our immigration not just on chain and family connections but actually what our nation needs to grow economically. i'm not antifamily. far from it. but we should have a reasonable system. canada doesn't do it this way. australia doesn't do it this way. the u.k. doesn't do it this way we still do. we should be able to resolve this. we should be able to deal with the issues of border security. there's been a lot of conversation about a wall. i don't think we should have a

2,000-mile long wall on our southern border but i do think we should be able to monitor our border and know who's coming in and out. not everyone is coming just to work. there are individuals that are trafficking drugs and people. we do need to be able to monitor that i heard folks say we don't need a wall anywhere. i totally disagree. this adage of a 20 whennen foot wall begs for a 21-foot ladder. if you talk to the homeland security folks, they would say fine, put a 20-foot ladder there because it slows down in the process. a wall is not designed to prevent you entirely. it's designed to slow you so we can actually interdict you in preventing you from coming in. you in arizona may tell the story when they put up a wall, how it dramatically slowed down crime in yuma, arizona rather than having an open border. there are areas we desperately need a wall. there are other areas we need vehicular barriers and other areas we need drones and greater technology, but we certainly need more pen knell in that area. -- more personnel in that area.

the president said let's ad 5,000 new people. you know how long it takes to hire one border patrol person? 450 days to hire one person on the border patrol. it's a broken system of hiring. we need to be able to fix that. we need to be able to do more rapid screening. we certainly need to take care of the issue of the sanctuary cities. all of the nation last week did a giant sigh for kate steinle's family as she was murdered in san francisco in a sanctuary city. from someone who had seven felonies and been deported five times and then a jury said because the bullet ricocheted off the ground, it wasn't really murder. he can go free. we've got to resolve the issue of sanctuary cities. that's unjust. we're better than that as a nation. and we certainly should resolve

the issue of daca. we have kids that have been in this country that have grown up in this country. they get up every day and they say the pledge of allegiance in this country. they speak perfect english. they have great grades and had no criminal history. when i ask people in my state who would you like to come into this country, to be able to join this country? if they say the pledge every day, if they speak perfect english, if they're passionate about entrepreneurship and starting companies and getting engaged, they join the military, that's exactly who the people of my state would like to see immigrate to this country and be a part of it. guess what? we've got almost a million of them already living here but they have no legal status. they were brought here as a child by their parents under no decision of their own. we should have a long-term legislative solution. this particular bill that's under discussion now has a short-term solution to that, something called the bridge act. it's a three-year legislative solution. it cries out for a longer solution but at least gives additional certainty more so than what daca has. i would challenge us as a body

to be able to look at all of these reasonable issues and to be able to say if we can't decide on these, let's start the conversation. what can we decide on? how far can we get? how much can we resolve in immigration? let's deit and let's -- let's do it and let's do it right in the conversation but let's finish it this time. we should negotiate with the house. they've got some great ideas. we should negotiate here. there's tremendous ideas on both sides of the aisle but let's certainly get it done. i look forward to that ongoing conversation. let's get this resolved in the days ahead. with that, mr. president, i yield the floor. mr. cornyn: mr. president? the presiding officer: the assistant majority leader. mr. cornyn: mr. president, i know the senator from arkansas has remarks to make so i'll keep mine brief but i want to speak on the introduction of the security enforcement and compassion united and reform efforts act with the secure act which we will under the provisions of rule 14 put on the

senate calendar following the vote on the nomination at 4:00. this bill is a product of a working group formed by chairman grassley of the senate judiciary committee, the committee with jurisdiction over immigration matters. i've been a part of that as have senators graham, tillis, lankford, perdue, and cotton. and i would say for our friend from illinois, we are all united in the desire to actually come up with a solution to this problem. our working group had two assignments. first was to adopt reforms to secure america's borders and enforce our immigration laws. and the second was to find a compassionate solution for those individuals who received deferred action under the daca program created by president obama in 200012. -- 2012. when i introduced a border security bill for building america's trust act in awpg, i made -- in august, i made clear the main purpose for that was to create solutions that we could put in place to deal with our

porous borders and that throwing money at the problem is not the answer. it was also contemplating that at some point in the not too distant future we would need to combine border security and enforcement measures with the solution for the recipients of the deferred action under president obama, which now president trump has sent appropriately back to congress for us to address. coming from the state with the longest border with a foreign country, the state of texas, i can tell you that my understanding and appreciation for border security is that it is multifaceted. it requires boots on the ground. it requires technology, and it requires improvements in aging infrastructure at our ports of entry. but it also requires new authorities and enhancements to existing immigration laws to close loopholes that would incentivize people to repeatedly violate our laws.

we can all agree that we need to protect america's international borders, whether they be to the north or south. but each day we fail to put needed resources and laws in place for border security and interior enforcement, we strengthen the resolve of drug cartels, gangs, and transnational criminal organizations to further encroach on our sovereignty with impunity. if we're going to act to help folks who are brought here by their parents which we all have compassion for and thanks to president obama's insistence for going around congress in violation of the law, they now find themselves in limbo. prioritizing the resources needed to secure the border is the first step. it's not the last step. it's the first step. and if we can demonstrate our ability to deal not only with the compassionate solution for the daca recipients and combine that with real border security and interior enforcement, i would propose that we don't need to stop there.

but we do need to regain the public's confidence that we're capable of dealing with these issues in a responsible way. the daca program is designed to help those who were brought here illegally, but it was not created lawfully. president trump as i said did the right thing when he kicked it back to congress. so we now introduced a bill that address the very issues that our friends across the aisle say they care about the most, a solution for the daca recipients. this bill provides the framework for a legislative proposal that we can support and that will regain america's trust. i've told both senator schumer, the democratic leader, and my friend, senator durbin, the senator from illinois, that i stand ready to work with them on a proposal that includes the five pillars of the g.o.p. framework. border security, interior enforcement, improvements to the e-verify system, and some limits on chain migration. and i hope they'll come back to the table and respond to this

proposal. i hope they'll also quit threatening to shut down the government which won't solve the problem but indeed will make it worse. mr. president, i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from arkansas. mr. cotton: i want to associate myself with much of what my republican colleagues have said about the immigration bill we're working on. or perhaps i should say to be more accurate, the immigration bill we should be working on. because the democrats at this point simply will not take yes for an answer. we're offering a package that they should support and in return they're threatening to shut down the government. so let me just dispense off the top with the argument such as it is about the so-called daca recipients. no one is eager to deport

690,000 illegal immigrants who are here mostly through no fault of their own. they were left in legal limbo by president obama, and everyone wants to find a good, durable, long-term solution. but if we're going to give legal status to these illegal immigrants in their 20's and their 30's, we have to recognize there are going to be negative side effects. first, you're going to encourage parents from around the world who live in poverty and oppression and war to illegally immigrate to our country with small children. what could be more dangerous and even immoral than that? and second, you're going to create a whole new category of americans who could get legal status for their extended family to include the very parents who brought them here in violation of our laws. we often hear that children ought not pay for the crimes of their parents. that may be so but surely

parents can pay for the crimes of the parents. they are the one who created the situation in the first place. now, i offered legislation with senator perdue earlier this year called the raise act. it had many me turs to replace -- me turs, to reform our refugee program and eliminate our diversity lottery. this congress needs to take up our legislation and pass it but today i want to focus on chain migration in particular. because chain migration is one of the biggest cat negotiation of immigration that -- categories of immigration that brings low skilled and high skilled people to this country did you know once you have legal status in this country, once you're a green card and become a citizen, you can bring to this country not only your spouse and unmarried children but your adult children and their spouses and their children and your adult brother and your adult

sister and your parents and their siblings and it goes on and on and on. that's why it's called chain migration. our legislation today would put a halt to chain migration. it's a kind of downpayment on long lasting immigration reform in addition to things like strengthening e-verify, improving security at our bord border, kate's law named in honor of kate steinle as you heard chairman grassley outline earlier today. we're also pairing those provisions with a bill that democrats and republicans should support, the bridge act. the idea of this bill is simple enough, that everyone who has a daca card gets provisional status. that gives them the certainty without giving them permanent residency or citizenship which i think sounds pretty reasonable. i know the democrats agree with me, too, because earlier this year, they were calling for passage of the dream act.

excuse me. the bridge act. and the bridge act is supported by members of both parties as chairman grassley outlined, including many prominent democratic senators. both senators from california, the senior senator from florida, the junior senator from new york, even the minority leader and the minority whip. in fact, the minority whip called the bridge act a bipartisan breakthrough. so if the democrats were to oppose our legislation today, the secure act, the question would be why? well, i think i know what they might say. they might say those terrible republicans have added a bunch of terrible republican ideas to this bill. but let me just ask which of these provisions are so certainly? that we secure ow border? -- secure our border? countries have borders and those borders have to be secure. that we stop unscrupulous employers from hiring illegal immigration, by strengthening

e-verify? when people say e-verify doesn't work, what they mean is e whennen verify work -- e-verify works. they want employers to be able to hire illegal immigrants, to take jobs away from americans and pay them submarket wages. what about discouraging illegal and highly dangerous illegal border crossings? and do we really want a system in which green cards are given out by random chance? because that is what we have, not just in the diversity lottery but through chain migration. today you can get a green card in this country simply because someone in your extended family happened to immigrate this country -- immigrate to this country, 30, 40 years ago irrespect your ability to stand on your own feet to asimple slate into our culture. shouldn't we have an immigration system that folk focuses on the needs of america's workers and

economy, not one that gives out green cards by random chance, the way we have today? shouldn't we be focused on the jobs and the wages of american citizens afte? after all, they are who elected us to come here to represent their interests. i don't think this is unreasonable. and i frankly think the democrats do either. they've supported the bridge act. they supported reform of other immigration programs, temporary visas, because they worry about the impact of immigration on lower-wage, blue-collar workers. and now the republicans have stepped up and done exactly what the democrats have said they wanted -- we have offered a real long-term solution for persons who have received a daca work permit. all we're asking nor exchange is commonsense reforms that would prevent another situation like the one happening now in the future.

so it's time for democrats and republicans to come together and support this bill. if you're serious about helping these daca permit recipients, you should vote for this bill now. it's good for those daca recipients. it is good for american workers. it is good for our communities and it would be a good first step towards lasting pro-american, pro-worker immigration reform. mr. president, i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. enzi: mr. president, you'd ask that the quorum call be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. enzi: i'd ask that all time be yielded back. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. enzi: i'd ask for the yeas and nays. sterster sufficient you have? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or wishing to change their vote? if not, the yeas are 62. the nays are 37. and the nomination is confirmed. under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's actions. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from alaska. mr. strange: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to legislative session for a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. strange: i suggest the

absence of a quorum, mr. president. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. mcconnell: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent that further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to executive session for executive calendar 455. the presiding officer: without

objection. the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, general services administration, emily webster murphy of missouri to be administrator. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the senate vote on the nomination with no intervening action or debate, if confirmed, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, the president be immediately notified of the senate's action, no motions be in order and any statements related to the nomination be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. the question somebody on -- the question is on the nomination. all those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nomination is confirmed. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent senate proceed to the consideration of the following nomination, executive calendar 501. the presiding officer: without objection, the clerk will report. the clerk: glenn r. myth of --

smith of iowa to be a member of the board. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the senate vote on the nomination with no intervening action or debate, if confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the president be immediately notified of the senate's action, no further motions be in order and any statements related to the nomination be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. the vote occurs on the nomination. those in favor say aye. those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nomination is confirmed. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent that at a time to be determined by the majority leader in consultation with the democratic leader, the senate proceed to executive session for consideration of calendar number 32 1-rbgs the nomination -- 321, joseph balish and that there be one hour of debate on the nomination and following the use or yielding back of time the senate vote on confirmation with

no intervening action or debate than had if confirmed the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the president be immediately notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: now, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to legislative session for a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i understand there is a will at the desk and i -- a bill at the desk and i ask for its first reading. the presiding officer: the clerk will read the title of the bill for the first time. the clerk: s. 192, a bill to increase resources for immigration laws and for other purposes. mr. mcconnell: i now ask for a second reading and in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule 14, i object to my own request. the presiding officer: objection having been heard, the bill will be read for a second time on the next legislative day. mr. mcconnell: when the senate completes it's business today,

following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, finally, following leader remarks the senate be in a period of morning business with are senators permitted to speak flinn for up to 10 minutes -- to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: if there is no further business, i ask that the senate stand adjourned following the remarks of our democratic colleagues. the presiding officer: without objection.

:

the presiding officer: the senator from delaware. mr. carper: good afternoon, mr. president. we've just concluded here a few minutes ago the confirmation of the president's nominee for the next secretary of the department of homeland security. the presiding officer, it turns out, is the chairman of the committee on homeland security, which has jurisdiction over the department of homeland security. i had the privilege of being the immediate past chairman of the committee. you and i worked together on a wide range of issues that actually pertain to the jurisdiction of the department of homeland security. i don't want to speak out of turn, but i believe both the presiding officer, also the chairman of the committee on homeland security and governmental affairs, and i believe one of the most important ingredients in the success of any organization, i don't care if it's a football

team, a body like this, the united states senate, a hospital, a school, a state, a country, the key is always leadership. it's always leadership. and leaders who always are interested in figuring out what is the right thing to do and doing it, not what's easier and believe in the golden rule, treating other people the way they want to be treated; leaders who focus on excellence in everything they do, they surround themselves with the best people they can find and sort of embrace the idea if a program is not perfect, let's make it better. and the best leaders that i've been privileged to serve with are those who just don't give up. and when they're sure they're right, they just don't give up. we've had a series, i've been privileged to know every secretary of of the department of homeland security since the beginning of time since i served as governor and when i served in the conference.

the first secretary we had and a number of of those who succeeded him. and most recently, john kelly, retired marine general, four-star general who came from his command in south com to become secretary of homeland security, now over at the white house and serving as the chief of staff to the president. we're grateful to him for his service. but as he has moved on to that post, he left a vacancy to lead the department of homeland security. and elaine duke is filling in, i think quite nicely as the acting secretary. she was previously the deputy secretary of homeland security. we'll see whether or not, now that kirstjen nielsen has been confirmed, whether or not elaine duke will step back and be the deputy. i think a number of us hope she will be, but that's not our decision to make. the vote today in favor of kirstjen nielsen's confirmation

was, i believe, 62 yes and i think maybe 37 no. and for me, every now and then we have the opportunity to vote, and it's a close call. not all of our votes are easy. some are more difficult than others. for a number of us, this was a close call. kirstjen nielsen, i think, is arguably bright. she is well-spoken. she has appeared before our committee and taken any number of questions. she's answered hundreds of questions from committee members, questions for the record. she's been good enough to meet with me not once but twice. and i said to her yesterday when we met that i think she is a person with a good heart and good values. well-spoken. i think she's bright. she's especially strong with respect to cybersecurity. the real question mark for me, one of the question marks for me, among others, was for someone who is, has at best

only led organizations with only a couple dozen people to now be thrust to, or selected to serve in a position where she'll be leading 240,000 people, the department of homeland security spread out all over the world, that's a daunting challenge. and someone who has been privileged to be 23 years of my life in the navy, i was a naval flight officer, treasurer, governor, led the national governors association, for me leading an organization of that size would be daunting. i would expect the same is true for kirstjen nielsen. john kelly, for six months was our secretary, has a lot of confidence in her. and i have a lot of confidence in john kelly. john mccain and i introduced him as the ranking member, as -- when john was nominated, john kelly was nominated to be secretary. john mccain sat on one side of the nominee. i sat on the other. i think we've taken his

recommendation to heart. that was maybe the tie breaker for some of us. when i spoke with kirstjen yesterday, we talked about her core values, what guides her in making her decisions. i think some of it is faith-based, which i find encouraging, the idea of treating other people the way that we want to be treated. the willingness to welcome people to our homes, our country who are strangers. we'll see how it plays out. we'll see how it plays out. i think it's really critically important that just as i try to surround myself with people who have strength where i have weaknesses, i think that's how it works out. i would say to kirstjen nielsen congratulations on your confirmation, and we look forward to working with you, hopefully agreeing a lot more often than we disagree. good luck and god bless. next, mr. president, i've got

a couple of charts here. i don't know if you can see them from where you're sitting. i can barely see them from right here. the first chart we're going to take a look at deals with the the -- on this side over here we have median household income for americans since 1987. over on this side, we have corporate profits in the billions of dollars. and when you come back here to 1987, we're looking at the, the orange line here that's median household income in 2016 dollars and the median household income in 1987 was just a shade over $50,000. and all these years later in 2017, it's just a little bit higher. it's gone up a little bit but not a whole lot. it may be close to $60,000, but i don't know that it's any

higher than that. it's gone up a little bit in really the last few years. the green, the green line here on our chart is corporate profits. if we go back to 1987, corporate profits were equal to about, it looks like 30 thousand million dollars. if i'm not mistaken, that would be maybe $30 trillion. i hope i have that right. that was 1987. if you look to what has happened, it's gone up and down. this is the great recession, when we fell into a cliff and almost fell off the world in 2007-2008, started climbing back out of it. but today the corporate profits are roughly double in this country since 1987. roughly double. while median household income is growing a tiny bit but actually not that much. let's look at the next chart. then i'll not speak from the

charts. i guess the lesson here is corporate profits have gone up rather nicely. some ups and downs because of the great recession, but on an uptick now. this is a look at national debt. i know our presiding officer has great concern about this. i came to the house in, i guess in 1983 and been straight treasurer, the state with the worst deficit in the country. we tied with puerto rico, we were a mess financially. we had a great governor, pete dupont, republican, did a wonderful job for eight years. i had the opportunity to serve with him as state treasurer and later on to be governor of the state of delaware when we went to triple a ratings for the first time in state history. i came here in 1982, 1983 as a congressman concerned about debts and deficits. my sense is that here in the senate and the house we don't have a lot of deficit hawks these day. if we do, their voices are not

heard very loudly. we're on a course that's unsustainable in terms of our accumulation of more debt. this is an interesting chart because it goes back to really the beginning of world war ii, a war my dad was in, my uncle served in. there's a lot of red ink here. look at that red ink. that shows the deficit as a percentage of gross domestic product. it reached about 30% right in the middle of world war ii. and after the war we have the green down here. we actually had surpluses in the late 1940's and early 19350's. we actual -- early 1950's. we had a surplus in 1968. we went from 1968 to about 1998 and never balanced a budget. all those years, one time. in the last four years of the clinton administration we balanced our budget four times. and it was a bipartisan deal, and the chairman of the house budget committee, if i'm not mistaken, was a republican from

ohio, john kasich, who is now the governor of ohio. john and i came to the house together in 1983. he came as a deficit hawk as well. he and the clinton administration and others in the house and senate did a nice job in helping us balance the budget. we haven't done so well since then. and since then we have shown right from here up to the present, which would be right around there, one deficit after the other. deficits that peaked out the last year of george w. bush's administration when we were falling into the great recession. we spent a lot of money in stimulus to try to get us out of the recession. it finally worked. it dropped by $1.4 trillion per year down to about one-third that much. and now it's starting to go up again. now it's starting to go up again. the debt last year, the year that ended on september 30, was a deficit at, a one-year deficit. it bounced back up to, i think

$666 billion in one year. one year. a lot of money. and the prospect going forward is not encouraging. it's actually discouraging. the tax cut bill was passed in this chamber just a few days ago, last saturday morning, in the middle of the night. a call for tax breaks, some for individuals for awhile. some for corporations tend to be more permanent in nature. for me, maybe the most troubling aspect of the tax bill that was enacted last saturday morning, aside from the fact the way it was pushed through, the idea that we got right here on the senate floor i think sometime around the middle of the evening on friday, last friday night a 400-page amendment, over 400 pages we never read, never seen, scribble on the side of the pages. the idea that somehow we're supposed to read that and understand it and then vote it up or down in four or five

house. good luck. that just doesn't happen. that would be the triumph of man's hope over experience. there were questions when people say what do you think we ought to do on tax reform? i say, one, it ought to be fair. what we actually passed is something where the, most of the benefits, the lion's share of the benefits go to people who frankly are very wealthy. the folks who are lower or more middle class, may see benefits following the adoption and implementation of the tax cut, but by 2025, income up to $75,000 per family, they are going to be realizing -- not a net gain from the tax cut, but a net loss, which is not good. i always ask, is it fair? i think it's not fair when you actually sit down and look at the numbers and see how middle-class income folks fair and those who are wealthier.

will it foster economic growth or diminish it? i focus a lot of my time and energy on economic growth, job yeetion and -- creation and conservation. we don't create jobs, we create a nurturing environment for the workforce, transportation infrastructure, public safety, access to water, wastewater, you name it. there's a lot of things that contribute to economic growth and so forth. tax policy is important. commonsense regulation, that's important as well. but my second question is, does the tax reform bill that we passed, does it foster economic growth? not really? to a modest extent, some, but not really. it suggests uncertainty, lack of

predictability going forward, which i don't think businesses care for. the one area that we decided not to spend any money at this time is the area where we could get the biggest bang for our buck in terms of growing g.d.p. we have at transportation infrastructure is woefully inadequate, terrible shape, rail, port, airports. we have many areas, broad areas of the country, that don't have access to the internet. we just passed a tax bill that will increase the deficit the by $1.5 trillion. unfortunately none of that goes to anything that would grow our economy by a lot, grow g.d.p. by a lot. we have employment opportunities for millions of people over the next decade or so, none of that is there. the third question, i always look at it in terms of tax reform, a question i always ask is, does it simplify the tax code or make it more complex. i don't have anything thick

enough, but the new provision will improve by this much, the thickness of the tax code, increase it by 20%. the last piece i consider is what the effect of the deficit is. it will make the deficit more by $1.5 trillion. we have a house and senate conference, i hope that is it more bipartisan than what we saw in the senate. it needs to be. last week i quoted, old african american proverb, if you want to travel fast, travel alone, if you want to go far, travel together. our republican friends have chosen, at least on this side of the congress, and i think on the other side, to go fast and go alone, and that's unfortunate. the last time we did tax reform it took three years, but it was

a more lasting outcome. i want to pivot and talk about workforce. most people when they think of folks, they hear dreamers, daca, they think of young people who were born in other countries and brought here by other parents and have no recollection of the country that they grew up in, but they've been here now. they came here, raised here, educated here, many of them in our public schools. some have the opportunity to go to college. we have a historically black college named the university of dover, a wonderful school that -- that i've been heavily invested in as governor and even now to make sure that they rise and continue to improve and very proud of all the progress made there. i was invited by their president henry williams to come to the

campus. while we were there, i met dreamers, daca students, who were brought here by their parents years and years ago. i met a lot -- i met a lot of college students in my day. i have been joined here on the floor by senator durbin from illinois and has been joined by at least as many or more since he is from a bigger state. i have never been more impressed by college students in my life than that. we happened to be there at 11:0n president obama announced that the time for the dreamers was going -- was going to expire i think in six months unless the congress was able to put together an agreement and pass legislation, which is hard to do without the support of the administration. i was there with the young people that day. i'll never forget what one young

man said. i think he was born in gawt mall awe, hon du jour -- guatemala or el salvador. we were recognizing these young people and celebrating their promise and potential. and right in the middle of all of this, we got this announcement, the administration announced about sending these folks in six months. not really home because their home is there, but back to the place where they were born. one young man, four, five, of the students, all undergrads. some were freshmen. this young man came here, i think from guatemala. he said as a young person, i honestly never remember living in my native country. the only country i remember is this country. he said for years -- he said i grew up in public schools. every day we would start our

school day in class in home room by standing and putting our hands over our hearts and pledging allegiance to the united states of america. and he said this is my home. this is my country. this is the only home i have ever really known. he went on to tell about his aspirations. i want to tell you, those kids, smart, born to parents who were engaged in their education, have high expectations for their children. a number of the students are working not one, but two jobs. i worked two jobs to help pay the bills. these students are too. they are taking courses including math, science, physics. they want do do the kind of work that, frankly, someone serving in the military, they want to be scientists and do all kinds of

things. when we have -- when we have some four to five million jobs, i'm told, that are literally going unfilled today, that people who just -- who maybe would like to do those jobs, don't have the skills to do them, maybe they can't pass a drug test, but at a time when we have three or four million jobs that are vacant, unfilled, employers are pleading for qualified applicants, somehow we're going to send 7,000 or 8,000 dreamers back to where they were born. that is not fair. this is not just a fairness argument for the dreamers in terms of turning our backs on their aspirations and hopes, but it is in our interest to keep them here. why would we educate them here and learn values here and ship

them off to another country and compete with us. they might start businesses of their own instead of doing that here. we don't always agree with the u.s. chamber of commerce, but in this case they are absolutely right. they are absolutely right. i think i'm going to stop right there. i see that the -- i have like a three-minute statement i'd like to read if i could from one of our dreamers in delaware. could i do that? i ask the senator -- our whip from illinois -- but i'm just going to read this about a woman living in wilmington, delaware, which is where my wife and i live. her name is kadine hayden. the letter goes like this, this is her voice -- my voice her words. my name is kadine, a community builder who happens to be a daca recipient. she said i was born in jamaica

but i have lived in the united states since i was 7 or 8. i grew up in delaware and moved to new york in 2012 and moved back to delaware after five and a half years in new york. she said i'm approaching 30 years old on march 1, so i have been in the united states for almost 23 years. my grandmother raised myself and two of my cousins. i grew up not understanding migration status and the implications it would have on my reality. i missed out on opportunities, but i assumed it was due to our financial lack. my grandmother worked hard but she couldn't read or write. after unjustly gaining a juvenile record after ignorance of my rights, i decided to become a lawyer. not fully understanding that migration status would bar me from attaining that dream. after that summer i gained a better understanding of my status and why i couldn't really

get a summer job or travel. in order to truly determine -- determined to work hard enough, surely i would attain all of my hopes an dreams. she said, i told my guidance counselor ha i understood about our -- what i understood about migration status and i was disappointed but remained determined. i believed god would reward my hard work and faithfulness, so i saw a different guidance counselor my 12th year and pleaded for help had she looked at my records, grade, and s.a.t. scores and by the grace of god she contacted me with someone who was able to get me into a local community college. i had the privilege of attending del tech on a full scholarship. i graduated with an associate

degree in business administration. god opened the door and i was accepted to go to college with scholarship assistance. i completed my degrees in 2011 and graduated in 2012 with my bachelors in administration with a concentration in financial management. after graduating from school and living and working in new york, katy moved back -- she's are my words -- move back to delaware. her words again, i work with a company that helps underserved youth that help in the medical field. i have been blessed to walk through the doors -- the doors i have though they were not the ones i oornlly pick -- originally picture walkerring through. i have helped to build up others, especially young people. i thought daca would allow me the chance to not only build up others, but myself as well. but with mr. trump as president, i find it hard to hold on to my

dreams. my daca status ends in march and with it all that i worked so hard to build over the last four years. she said -- in closing, she said, i wrote this long ee hail to -- e-mail to simply ask that you fight for people like me. we don't use -- didn't choose to be here but we're grateful to be here. it is where we have worked hard for the american dream, our dream. this is where those we hold dear reside. it is my prayer that you will fight for me. it is my prayer you will fight for me and others like me. it is my prayer that you will be our voice in congress. it is my prayer that you will humanize us to politicians who marginalize and demonize us. it is my hope prayer that you will fight for us. your prayer has been heard.

i'm yielding back -- i want to say to my colleague, senator durbin, thank you for years of leadership -- years of leadership on this issue to do the right thing and treat other people like we would want to be treated. and to do the right thing in terms of strengthening our economy in this country. thank you so much. the presiding officer: the senator from illinois. mr. durbin: i want to thank my colleague from delaware. we came from the house of representatives and we've had the privilege of serving together in the united states senate. when he's on my team, i feel much stronger because i know tom carper is a person of good values and hard work. his state is lucky to have him and i'm lucky to have him as a friend and i thank him for joining me on this issue. 16 years ago i introduced a bill. the bill was for young people who were brought to america by their parents who were young and

didn't know much about the immigration experience, grew up in the united states thinking they were just like all the other kid in the classroom and then realized one day they weren't. you see they are not legal. their parents didn't do it properly, didn't file the ratepayers. i am notholding it against their parents. their parents were doing the best they could. they were taking risks that many of us would take any day for a son or daughter 0 to have a chance to live a good life. but here were these young people in the united states undocumented, and what were they to do? they didn't know that old country where their parents came from. they may not have even been able to speak the language of that country, and here they were in the united states. they thought things would work out some way or another. time passed and it didn't. we have a broken immigration system. we have a lot of gaps in the system and they were caught up in one of them. so 16 years ago i introduced a bill and here's what it said.

if you came to the united states under the age of 18, if you grew up in this country, you didn't have any serious problems with the law, you graduated from school, we were going to give you a chance, a chance to earn your way into legal status. you could do it by furthering your education, volunteering for the military, there were a lot of ways to do t but we sawed to these young people, this will be your chance. well, that bill was introduced a long time ago. it's never become the law. at one point back when president obama was in the office of the presidency, i wrote him a leg with 20 of my colleagues in the senate and asked him if he could find a way to protect that's young people from being deported out of america. he did. they called it daca. the daca program said, if you are one of the people who by definition under the dream act would be eligible, you can stay in the united states if you step up and pay about $500 in a filing fee, go through a serious criminal background check, be interviewed, and then we'll give

you a temporary, two-year protection from deportation, two years that you can work legally in the united states and come back and see if you want to renew it. with at the end of the day, 780,000 young people in america did that. they paid their fee. they went through the background check. they submitted all their information to our government and they were protected. just three months ago, president donald trump abolished daca and said, as of march 5 next year, it's gone. what does that mean for these young people? it means as of march 5 56 next year, many will be subject to deportation and subject to losing th the jobs they have. i have meat a lot of those young people u they are heartbroken and they are said. and they worry about what's going to happen to them and

their families when march 5 rolls around. and so for weeks, months since president trump's announcement i h. i have come to the floor and said, for goodness sakes, can't we agree to fix this problem? president trump challenged us, do your job, congress. pass a law. that's what we were supposed to do. here we were three months later and it hasn't been done. what i hear from the other side of the aisle is, give us a little more time. we'll try to get to it next year. march 5, 2018, daca is over and finished. waiting several weeks is bad enough. waiting several months is unacceptable. and i'll tell why you it is. because we know this needs to be done now. 34 republicans in the house of representatives today sent a letter to the speaker of the house, paul ryan, calling for congress to pass legislation to protect dreamers this year.

34 republicans. they said, and i quote, it is imperative that republicans and democrats come together to solve this problem now and not wait until next year. 34 republicans in the house. how many bipartisan things go on around here anymore? not many. here's one. i salute these member of the house. i salute the four republican senators who joined me in cosponsoring the dream act. they, i think, have stuck their next out, and i respect them so much for it. i'll stand up for them because of it. i thank them for that. and i know why they're doing it. they're not doing it for me. they shouldn't. and i'm sure they're not. they're doing for these young people because i'll tell you without fail when you meet them, they convert you in a main minu. for the last several years, i've come to the floor to tell their stories. i'm told that the one i'll going to tell right now is the 99th time i've told a story like

this. and each time i tell one of these stories, it makes the case for why we need to do something to help these young people and do it quickly. let me show you this wonderful young lady here. her name is blanca morales. blanca morales, brought to the united states business her parents from mexico, grew up in santa ana, california, growing up, she took coffer her two younger siblings. her parents worked in the factories and agricultural fields of california. she was quite a student. in high school she was named of the top 100 students in the nation. she was active in community is mentoring students who couldn't complete high school without help. she attend add community college, santa ana college. i might add, because she is a undocumented, she didn't qualify for any federal government assistance. going to college in that circumstance means working, scraping by, putting things off,

sacrificing to get through. she did it. she majored in chemistry and biology. she was part of phi beta kappa, an international honor society, won first academic team in the all-u.s.a. academic competition. she was her class' valedictorian with a perfect 4. g.p.a. blanca, after graduation, attended the university of cal irvine, majored in neurobiology and at u.c. irvine she grad i think withed with -- graduated with honors magna cum laude. after attaining this premed degree, she couldn't land a job in the medical field because she is undocumented in america. then in 2012, everything changed. president obama established the daca program i mentioned earlier which allowed blanca for the first time in her life to get a permit to legally work in

america. last year blanca morales was accepted to the harvard school of medicine. she's remained involved in community service, mentoring students, teaching health classes at a community health center and volunteering as a translator at clinics for spanish-speaking patients. close to 70 dreamers are enrolled in medical schools around the country, just like her. but without daca, these dreams will never become doctors. why? they're going to be deported back to their countries they're not -- if they're not lucky. and if they happen to be able to say, they cannot legally work in america without daca status. you cannot finish medical school and go on to a residency without a work permit, without being able to legally work in america. they cannot legally work without daca protection and president trump has ended it. well, are we going to be a stronger nation if we deport her? tell her to leave, go back to

mexico, which you left when you were five years of age, give up on all the education she's put on the board at the community college where she was leading her class on to get her graduate degrees, on to be accepted at harvard medical school? the answer is clear. america would be less if she left. the association of american medical colleges reports the nation faces a doctor shortage which is only going to get worse. both the a.m.a. and the american association of medical colleges have warned that ending daca will make this problem worse. and they've urged congress to do something. blanca wrote me a letter. sheer's what she said. it took me eight years from graduating the university to enter medical school. without daca or better yet a full way to become a member of society, i'm left to live in the shadows. i don't know if i'll be able to finish my medical training

without a permanent solution to my i ammigration status. -- to my i ammigration status. please help me keep my dream of being a citizen alive. when my colleagues come to the floor and say we're just too busy take up this issue, i wish they'd have an opportunity to meet this spectacular young woman. she's asking us to do our job. we're supposed to solve problems. p when you read the numbers -- 70%, 80% of americans aimprove of the dream act, even an overwhelming majority of those who voted for president trump believe these young people deserve a chance to be legal in america, why can't we get our job done? we need to do it and do it now. we've got three weeks before we're likely to end the session this year. i want to see us get this finished this year. i want to see a bipartisan agreement. came to the floor earlier and listened to the speeches of many

of my colleagues, one from north carolina, another from oklahoma, one from the state of it another from the state of arkansas. each one of them said there are lots of things we need to do to fix our immigration s i couldn't agree more. i was on the task force, the gang of eight they called it, that came up with a comprehensive immigration reform. took us months to do t but we did t we did everything we could think of within the four corners of immigration reform. we passed it on the floor of the senate with a strong bipartisan roll call and the house of representatives refused to even consider it. that doesn't mean the problems have gone away. they're still here. but what i'm sawing to my colleagues is, don't try to fix every mime immigration problem you can think of on the backs of these dreamers like blanca morales. i'm willing it to talk to you honestly, forthrightly about border security. count me n i voted for it as part of comprehensive immigration reform. but every notion, every idea, every theory that you have about

immigration shouldn't be placed on the shoulders and backs of these young people. let's fix this and then let's go on to the next phase of dealing with immigration reform in its totality. that makes sense to me. i'm read to bargain, work, compromise in good faith with any member of the republican side and the democratic side that wants to make sure that a young woman like this deserves a fighting chance in eric in. i believe -- in america. i believe that. i think most americans believe it, too. now, let's roll up our sleeves and go to work. there are plenty of things to do the remainder of this year that will make a big difference in her life and in the future of america. mr. president, i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from california. ms. harass is: i'd like to thank -- ms. harris: i'd like to thank the senior senator from

illinois. i know his passion and his personal commitment to this issue. i thank you, senator durbin. mr. president, on february 16 of this year, which was 292 days ago, i offered my maiden speech. as a new member of the united states senate. and the subject of the speech was immigration and in particular an emphasis on daca and the dreamers. here we are 292 days later and we have failed to move forward in any substantial or substantive way in bringing relief to these dreamers who have qualified for daca status. and so we stand here, these 292 days later, talking about an issue that we must ultimately and before the end of this year resolve. let's also be clear, three months ago today on september 5

of this year the administration arbitrarily, recklessly and cruel ended daca, the deferred action for childhood arrivals program. daca allowed young immigrants who were brought here by their parents to live and work in this country without fear that they would be deported. later this week on friday, december 8, funding for the government runs out. and i have been clear along with my friend from illinois and several other colleagues that any bill that funds the government must also include a fix for daca. i want to talk with you about why i believe it is important that we resolve this issue. because i do believe there is a lot of misinformation out there and i think it is important we as policymakers, as leaders in our country, that we craft and create public policy based on facts, not in misinformation and certainly not fear. so let's be -- begin by being very clear. the decision to rescind daca is

part of a much broader and troubling attempt to remake the demographics of the country by cracking down on immigrants. we have an administration that has ignited anti-immigrant sentiment, characterizing immigrants as rapists and murderers and people who are going to steal your jobs. and we have an administration that has implemented an aggressive anti-immigrant agenda. this administration has called for a border wall that could cost up to $70 billion. they've implemented muslim bans which severely restrict immigration from six muslim-majority countries. they've requested 10,000 new i.c.e. agents -- new i.c.e. agents -- and 5,000 new border patrol agents when they've not given the resources to be able to fill all the vacant positions they now have. and they've protected -- they have anded the protected immigration status known as

t.p.s. for asians and nicaraguaians who fled disasters and cracked down on the protected status of salvadorans as well. they're seeking to lower the refugee cap from 110,000 to 45,0 at a time when we've seen an increase in the worldwide number of refugees who are in crisis. and this is the lowest number ever in the history of this country, actually since 1980. and then general john kelly, the president's chief of staff and former homeland security secretary, said that he wishes the number was between zero and one, the number of refugees we would admit into our country. now, i want to be clear, i have an incredible amount of respect for the men and women of the department of homeland security who each day leave their homes committed to doing the work of keeping our homeland secure. it is noble and important work,

and their mission is critical. and the vast majority of those front-line agents, i believe, are doing their jobs honorably and effectively. but it is troubling when the white house has encouraged front-line agents to, quote, take the shackles off. in fact, the acting i.c.e. director has said, quote, if you're an immigrant in this country illegally, you should be uncomfortable. you should look over your shoulder. and when you look at these independent acts, there is a clear constellation that's formed. this enforcement surge is a barely disguised purge. and this is not leadership. leaders should not be in the business of inciting fear and sowing hate and division. instead, leaders should be about creating smart public policy

based on facts. so here are some of the facts. it is a fact that there are 700,000 daca recipients, 200,000 of which are in california alone. it is a fact that the dreamers have been extensively vetted before they qualified for daca. they have gone through a process. they have turned over copious amounts of paperwork with incredible detail. they have gone through background checks. they have given personal information about the circumstances of their arrival. they have answered questions that seek to figure out whether they have committed a crime. if they applied and received daca status, we have determined they are not a threat in that regard to our public safety. we asked questions that sought to figure out if they have graduated high school, are they living a lawful and productive life. and it is only when they cleared that extensive vetting that they qualified for daca status and

received daca status. let's be clear that these dreamers who receive daca status, they study in our colleges, they serve in our military, they work in fortune 100 companies. and they are contributing to our economy in a way that we all are benefiting. if daca recipients were deported, it is estimated that california would lose $11 billion a year. the united states -- the united states economy as a whole would lose an estimated $460 billion over a decade. it is a fact also that these young people have stood in classrooms and stood in line in many places and placed their hand over their heart, pledging allegiance to the flag of the united states. a flag that many of us wear on our lapel, a flag which represents the best of what we are in terms of the ideals upon

which we were founded. we must be true to those ideals and consistent in the way that we approach so many issues as apply to this issue about what we do with these daca kids. we must keep our word and our promise to them and guarantee what we promised, which is that we would not share their personal information with i.c.e., they would not be deported if they continued to follow the rules. and in my experience, it is also true that many who have an opinion or have expressed an opinion or who have the opportunity to make a decision about this issue have never met a dreamer. we can't fault that, but what we can ask is that those who have the power to make a decision on this issue make it their business and make an effort to really understand who we're talking about.

senator durbin talked about it. senator carper talked about it. my colleagues will be talking about who these dreamers are, who these young people are. and, you know, i have to tell you i have been a bit troubled when i have had this conversation. i remember when i had a conversation many months ago with the then-nominee to head up the department of homeland security, general john kelly, and i asked him if he had ever met a dreamer, and he said he had not. and then went on to say when i asked, well, can i arrange a meeting, he said how about if i could take a meeting instead with their representative? that's disheartening. before our colleagues make a decision about where they stand on this policy, i believe it is only fair, it is only the right thing to do that they make an effort to sit down and talk with a dreamer and get to understand who they are and the circumstances of their arrival and how they are contributing to our country.

they are going -- there are going to be hundreds of dreamers here tomorrow on capitol hill, and i want to thank them for their leadership and their tireless advocacy because their stories will change hearts and minds. and let me just tell you a few. my colleagues have shared some. i'll share some others. i have met yuriana ago larry, who i brought to the president's joint session address this february. her parents brought her here from mexico when she was just 5 years old. she grew up in fresno, california. she attended public schools. she attended u.c.merced. she was the first daca recipient to earn a ph.d. and now is a biomedical researcher in chicago focused on the human heart. doing everything she can to improve the condition and the lives of the people in our country because of the work that she has done and the research she has done. i have met eric yang who came

from south korea. he grew up inner vine, california, and is now studying business economics at u.c.-irvine where he helped other students. my husband and i attended a play recently in los angeles. it's a great program where there is free entertainment in the park community. park and families show up and have a wonderful evening outdoors with each other in fellship. and i met a young woman who came up to me, and she was with a group of friends, and her friends said tell her, tell her. i looked at this young woman. she looked like she was maybe about 19 years old. i said tell me what, tell me what's going on. she looked up and she looked at me and she spoke so quietly, i didn't hear what she said, and i asked her to repeat herself. and she looked at me and she started crying and she said i am daca. and she was trembling as she cried, absolutely in fear of

what her future may hold. so i suggest that before we take a position on this issue, let's take a moment each one of us, our colleagues and each of us as individuals to see these young people, to truly see them, and to see them not through a lens that is about partisanship or politics, not through a lens that is ideological, but instead to just see them based on who they are, and the practical realities of the life that they live that brought them to this country, the circumstances that brought them to this country, and the lives that they are living every day now. these are incredible young people who are doing everything we hope and pray will epitomize the american dream, work hard, be respectful, play by the rules, contribute to your community, have dreams and

aspirations about how you can be productive. that's who these young people are. so let's reject the fearmongering. let's also understand that this is an imminent issue and this is something we must address immediately. let's agree that each day in the life of these young people is a very long time. each day that they go to sleep at night worried about a knock on the door at midnight that might tear them away from their families is a very long time. let's not wait. let's not wait to help them, and let's reject those folks who say there is no crisis, folks who say this is not an emergency. let's understand that for these 700,000 dreamers who cannot concentrate at school or at work and who are terrified of that

midnight knock, this is an emergency. let's think about the classmates and the co-workers and our neighbors and family members who have these children who are terrified that this protected status will be stripped and taken away. for them, this is an emergency. let's think about the 122 dreamers who are losing daca status every single day. 851 of them every week. over 11,000 of them since september. and let's agree this is a crisis, this is an emergency. it's been 91 days since this administration ended daca, and we cannot wait a single day longer. so let's reject the fearmongering, let's find a bipartisan consensus to act in the way we know we should and can. let's put the dream act to a

vote today. i believe it could pass and would pass if everyone looked in their hearts and looked at the facts. today 35 house republicans just signed a letter saying they want a daca fix before the end of the year, and it included members from california and texas and florida and utah and pennsylvania and new york. earlier today, my colleague, the junior senator from arizona, said, quote, we don't need to make a faiment statement. we need to make a law. i couldn't agree more. let's give these dreamers a future. i yield the floor. mr. markey: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from massachusetts. mr. markey: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, thank you for chairing this today. i thank the senator from illinois, dick durbin, for organizing all of us this afternoon to speak on behalf of

these dreamers. your leadership has been critical in this fight for dignity and recognition for hundreds of thousands of wonderful young people who know no other home than the united states of america. for five years, the deferred action for childhood arrivals or daca program has created security and opportunity for young immigrants around the country, but now the futures of some 800,000 young people, 7,90, are needlessly in jeopardy because president trump has cold-heartedly repealed daca. daca has been a hugely successful program. it has provided so many young immigrants safety, security, dignity, respect, and opportunity. these are young people who study, who work, who live next door to us every single day.

they are our friends, our neighbors, and our loved ones. i'd like to speak today for a few minutes about one of these daca beneficiaries, and that person is 28-year-old jolla sanchez who came to the united states from bolivia when she was 14 years old. paula's father had passed away when she was just 8 years old. her mother was in a wheelchair and unable to work, so with her family facing hardship, paula came to america to live with an aunt and uncle in new york. there, paula worked in the manufacturing industry while getting high school education full time, often getting home late at night and grabbing a few hours of sleep before getting up to head to school to do it all over again. in 2007, paula graduated from high school and moved to my

state of massachusetts where she has lived ever since. she now works 30 hours a week as a case manager while attending baystate community college full time. she has been a model student, earning a 3.9 grade point average, and she hoped to enter the nursing school in january. paula has been a daca recipient since 2013, but her current status expires next year, and that means that unless congress acts and saves the program, paula and thousands like her will have to leave the united states for countries they do not really know and they no longer consider home. paula's case, like many others, is even more difficult because she has a 4-year-old son, a child who is an american citizen by birth and has never known any other home than the united states. all paula wants is to stay here

with her son, get her nursing degree, and get a good job and give back to the country so much more than she has been given. instead, paula and countless other young people and families across the united states face uncertain futures. instead of going to sleep tonight knowing they will be able to live their lives in peace and plan for the future, they are left again with uncertainty, vulnerable to deportation and unable to work legally. this is a human tragedy in the making. it is heartbreaking. it is unjust. it is just plain wrong. we should not punish these young people who have no other home than the united states of america. we should not go back on the word we gave when we told these young people to come out of the shadows.

these dreamers are engineers, police officers, teachers, future nurses and students. many in our great massachusetts colleges and universities. they serve bravely in our military. they are our best and brightest and are making the most of the opportunities that the united states has always provided to immigrant communities. the ball's in the court of the republican leadership in the house and senate. speaker paul ryan, leader mitch mcconnell can either listen to a growing chorus of their own colleagues, to business c.e.o.'s, including apple, amazon, microsoft, facebook, general motors, academic leaders, to countless college and university presidents, all of whom support daca. or they can side with the forces of intolerance and injustice. congress should pass the dream act so that people like paula, who were brought here at a young

age and who have served in the military or pursued higher education, can earn citizenship. i urge everyone to listen to dick durbin, to listen to this chorus of voices from around our country. protect these 800,000 young people. protect them because they deserve it, and america will be the beneficiary of these great americans who are serving our country right now. so i thank you, mr. president. i yield back the balance of my time. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from new hampshire. a senator: thank you very much, mr. president. i want to thank my colleague from massachusetts for his eloquent words right now and i want to thank senator durbin for his leadership on this critically important issue. ms. hassan: as many of my colleagues have stated, we must protect dreamers and allow them to continue to be vital members

of communities in new hampshire and across the nation. the energy, hard work and innovation of dreamers are critical components of our economic future. these are hardworking young people who have so much to offer and who deserve our support and our urgent action. they are people like the young man from the sea coast area of new hampshire who recently met with my staff. this young person was brought to the united states when he was in elementary school. his parents emigrated from indonesia, joining members of the new hampshire indonesian community who had left their country because they were fleeing religious persecution. for years members of this community have worked, paid taxes, and raised their families on the sea coast. and now the trump administration is engaging in misguided efforts

to prioritize their deportation, efforts that i urge this administration to stop immediately. the dreamer i'm talking about this afternoon never knew that he was undocumented until he wanted to go get his driver's license. but he said his life was changed after president obama unveiled the daca program. this young man was able to get a job, attend community college, and eventually enroll at the university of new hampshire where he is working towards his degree. his story makes clear why there is so much at stake and why it's critical that our colleagues work together in order to support these young people. granite staters, like all americans, recognize the value of hard work, the importance of unleashing the talent and energy

of each and every individual, and they demand and expect that their elected leaders act with fairness and with common sense. , which which is all that the dm act represents: fairness and common sense. we must pass the bipartisan dream act now and protect those who have so much to offer to the future of our great country. thank you, mr. president, and i yield the floor. ms. warren: mr. president.

the presiding officer: the senator from massachusetts. ms. warren: thank you, mr. president. i've been sitting on the floor for awhile listening to other senators just tell amazing stories about young people who came to this country as children and how they have thrived, how they have become woven into a part of american fabric. these are stories of courage, stories of hope. and it's inspiring to listen to these stories. but what i wanted to talk about tonight is i wanted to add another piece to this, to this story, and that is about why it all matters, why it matters that we have a dream act. this is reina guivera. she is a massachusetts resident. when she was 11 years old, she fled from el salvador and

settled with her move in everett, massachusetts. she is a model student. after completing high school and graduating with high honors from bunker hill community college she won a scholarship. she transferred to the university of massachusetts at boston where she currently has a double major in philosophy and in public policy. now, until daca came along, reina had to live in the shadows, and living in the shadows wasn't easy. she worked long hours in a restaurant where she was subjected to sexual harassment. knowing that she didn't have legal status, reina's boss frequently propositioned her to have a sexual relationship with him and threatened to report her to immigration authorities if she didn't go along with what he wanted. so instead of giving in to her boss's advances, reina quit her job, even though her boss

refused to pay her for the work that she had already completed. daca changed the world for reina. it meant protection. it meant that she could go to work without the fear of being, sent back to a country that she barely knows. it meant that she had access to more jobs or she wouldn't have to face exploitation, hugh mill ation and sexual -- humiliation and sexual harassment. it meant reina could pay in-station tuition and become the first person in her family to complete college, opening up even more doors of opportunity. right now we're in the middle of a long overdue discussion about sexual harassment and sexual assault. women are bravely coming forward to tell their stories about powerful men who have abused their power to hurt others. sexual assault isn't just happening in silicon valley or in hollywood or in legislative

chambers. it is happening all across america. at hotels and fast-food restaurants and convenience stores. and if you're a woman without official status, you have yet another barrier to speaking out. when the daca program started, we made a promise to young people like reina. we promised them that if they came out of the shadows, they would have an opportunity to live and to work and to go to school without the fear of deportation. we promised to protect them. donald trump broke that promise when he ended daca. but there's something congress can do right now to help reina and other dreamers like her. young people who came to the u.s. as kids and who have spent their lives reaching for their dreams. we can pass a clean dream act, a bipartisan bill that would give young people like reina

status and a path to citizenship, a bill that protects those young people without subjecting their parents or their siblings to deportation. we could do that, but time is running out. soon daca recipients will begin losing their status and will be subject to deportation. we can stop that from happening, but we have to act soon. i am ready to vote, and many of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle are ready to vote. so i have one question for mitch mcconnell. what is stopping you? we're ready to pass this bill. just give us a vote. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor.

the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. merkley: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from oregon.

the senate is in a quorum call. mr. merkley: i ask that the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. merkley: i ask unanimous consent for my intern scott larochelle to have privileges of the floor for the balance of the day. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. merkley: mr. president, i rise in the conversation about getting the dream act passed. i thank senator durbin for his passion, his unrelenting commitment to protecting our dreamers -- our american dreamers. he's been on this floor day after day, month after month advocating that we have to address this situation in which individuals came to the united states as small children, they've grown-up here, speak english, they've been totally emersed in making our community and state and nation stronger and we need to make sure that we treat them fairly, with respect,

and that we ensure that we're able to benefit from their presence here just as they benefit from being here in the united states. 800,000 dreamers across our country. they all very much appreciate his leadership. the young men and women who came out of the shadows to be part of daca, deferred action for childhood arrivals, were made a promise that they would be all right if they did so, that their information would not be used to deport them. and so theec a -- and so they took a gamble that the united states would stand by the commitment it was making to them and now they are wondering what happened because their futures are dangling by a thread. the program's been abandoned by

the president and if not replaced by legislation done right here in this room, they basically will be subject to being deported to places where they don't speak their language, they don't understand their culture, they are not familiar with it, they don't have any network. they are really kind of stateless individuals that are in a very tough condition. one person like this from salem, oregon is volanda. in -- danna -- dianna. she came here from mexico as a toddler. she has lived her entire life since here in america. growing up here in america, dianna dreamed of becoming a first responder. during her high school years she volunteered for red cross and

her emergency response team, but that doubt was thrown into doubt when she was diagnosed with thyroid cancer her senior year. she has fought that cancer and she has beat that cancer and she graduated from high school more determined than ever to pursue her vision of how she could contribute to her community. she has contributed. she enrolled and put herself through the firefighting and paramedic program at her local community college. and now she has made a career for hers as an emergency medical technician, an e.m.t. she is every day working, literally, to save lives, and we're threatening to kick her out of the country -- the only country she has ever known. diana said a few years back when the daca program was first being

discussed, america is my home. this is the place i love where everyone and everything i know is. i know nothing outside the united states. whatever punishment i must pay, i am willing to do so. all i ask for is a chance. better yet, i beg for a chance to prove that i am not a criminal, that i have much to offer that beautiful place. that's in her words her vision, her desire to be able to fully participate in our society. now, just recently over pranks giving -- pranks -- thanksgiving i led a delegation to burma. burma has had horrific circumstances occur, they have a

population of muslims called rowinga and -- rhoinga. many of them came 200 years ago and they came because they were imported for labor and they farmed the rice paddies and fished their boats off the coast, but they've never really been accepted by burma. burma recognized in their 1982 law 182 minorities but not the rohingya because the minority has a kind of hostile relationship with them. they have always been treated as second-class citizens. so much so that in the middle of the state there are about 120,000 people living in camps. they are not allowed to leave the camps, they are not given

citizenship rights. in the northern part of the state 300 villages were burned, engaged in systemic rape, proceeded to shoot people as they left their villages and now 600,000 people have gone into bangladesh. the reason i raise this is not a parallel situation, but there is at its core a similar issue, and that issue is whether a nation thrives by entertaining the situation of having a stateless population. burma had a stateless population that it did not recognize, did not allow to be fully engaged. they weren't even second-class citizens because they weren't allowed citizenship. well, we have now a tremendous population of young folks who have grown-up in america.

they are culturally american. many of them had no idea they were born abroad, and they are ready to be full participants if we will let them. and won't we be so much better off to enable them to rise to their full potential, to make their full contribution, to have a full measure of participation in our society. we have her story, but multiply that times 800,000 people. what a fantastic reservoir of talent and ability, energy, passion waiting to be fully contributed to being part of the united states of america. while we delay these 800,000 young members of our communities are in limbo. they are waiting for us to act.

they know that the daca program -- they took a gamble by joining it. they know that the federal government has all of their information to track them down and deport them. would wouldn't -- wouldn't that violate the spirit of the daca program? let's get the dream act done. earlier today i was here on the floor listening to the conversation from some of my colleagues, and they were saying, well, let's get it done by march. and i say to my colleagues across the aisle, let's not wait until march, let's not wait until february, let's not wait until january. let's engage in the conversation now. let's get it done by the end of the year. these young folks have waited a long time. they have waited too long so let's address it and let's maintain in our hearts the spirit that has animated our nation. all of us, unless we are 100%

native americans, either we came from foreign lands or our parents or parents' parents came from other lands. we know what that was like. it was difficult many times. but our families found their place. let's enable these young folks, these dreamers, to find their place. it will be far better for them and far, far better for us. thank you, mr. president. the presiding officer: the the presiding officer: the

this weekend on american history tv. the eastern yale university history and on alexander hamilton. >> with washington being president he made hamilton the nation's first secretary and internet post hamilton structured a natural financial system and pushed to strengthen and empower the national government. this appears political battle against those who wanted a far less powerful national government. obviously, thomas jefferson, james madison for his foremost political opponents. >> sunday at 4:00 p.m. eastern

on real america. the 19 '80s training film, unwelcome affection, about inappropriate behavior in the workplace. >> you are new here on the staff? and you're on the staff then i make a lot of decisions and i'm the one that picks up evaluation report and i plan three-day passes and leaves and over the price if you want to get along with the staff will be beneficial to you to be nicer to me. >> at 8:00 p.m. on the presidency, historian daniel on andrew jackson's efforts to challenge and cripple the bank of the united states during the 1830s. >> no president for had said anything like this. other presidents had warned americans against entangling foreign alliances. they had warned americans against sectionalism and excessive partnership at home in jackson warned them against control of their own government by, in his words, the rich and powerful.

>> american history tv. all weekend, every weekend, only on c-span3. >> earlier today minority leader chuck schumer and majority whip john cornyn came to the floor to speak about the republican tax reform bill that passed by the chamber last. they were followed by remarks i from john thune of south dakota and bernie sanders of vermont.c. this is aboutut an hour.mitteehe >> mr. president, even as my republican friends moved toir reconcile their to tax bills in a conference committee, theirxia problems are far from over. at the heart of their bill is ag toxic lee unpopular idea. giant tax breaks on big corporations and the very wealthy paid for by cutting cars and raising taxes on millions of middle-class families. the new republican party