cornyn: mr. president, i would ask unanimous consent to speak for up to 45 minutes between now and the time that our vote is scheduled this morning on my amendment. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cornyn: thank you, mr. president. i won't be taking all that time right now. i'll reserve some of that time and hopefully colleagues will come down to the floor and engage in discussion. as you know, mr. president, i've been talking about the importance of border security in this immigration bill. and just to remind anybody who happens to be listening, i come from a state -- texas -- that has the longest common border with the country of mexico, 1,200 miles. and while many of our colleagues, or some of our colleagues come from states like california, where san diego they like the fence that they have there, that they view as restricting illegal immigration into the country. tucson and arizona has a different situation because much of the land is federal land. in texas our 1,200 mile common

cornyn's bill is covered in the magical pixie dust of totalle decollusion. among other things, 100% situational awareness of a 2,000-mile long border is about as likely as ensuring that every tooth in america is brushed before bedtime. cornyn's amendment would also leave undocumented citizens waiting for decades until a path to citizenship is available and it would cost a whole lot of money. >> we cannot, should not, and will not tell those who have waited in the shadows for so long that they should wait for 25 years. >> the money has to come from somewhere. where is it coming from? if the senator takes money from one -- adds money one place, it has to come from someplace else. that's simple first grade mathematics and i think it is incredible that the senator should stand there and say, yeah, we're adding these thousands of personnel but yet there's no additional cost. that's not possible. >> but reality, and its attendant concerns has not kept marco rubio from entertaining the idea of 100% situational awareness of the 2,000-mile border. last week rubio sup

not even cornyn. of putting border enforcement -- if you look at the fbi statistics, like i have, and followed this for a lot of years, the border has been certifiably safe for year after year after year. the top ten -- 10 out of 13 border cities are seeing decreases in violent crime year after year. so, it shows the degree of -- like, of simulation and kind of matrix-like nsa -- >> but what we're talking -- so what we're talking about, though, is the base bill, you could say the issue of border security is a distraction anyway, and this is sort of a grand compromise, right? if you're going to get any republican votes you have to do something to involve border security. the jump cornyn is making here with an amendment that picked up a lot of support among republicans this week is tying that to the path of citizenship saying there will be no path to citizenship. i'm curious, which you say why when people say it's a poison pill, why? >> our organization, presente.org, latinos don't want what is presente

the cornyn amendment is dead. he's apparently going to come back and try with orrin hatch to come back and salvage pieces of it and reintroduce it in smaller pieces but that was showing the resilience and efficacy of the gang of eight, the integrity of the gang of eight process which has been an amazing thing. >> i think you're going to see some version -- the cornyn amendment i think was dead on arrival but i think there is going to be a significant effort to toughen up the border treatment in the house and even on the senate and there will be considerably more movement on a lot of things in the house. >> can i just this really quickly, i think when we say toughen up on the border, what really -- what that means for republicans right now is moving up at least with the cornyn amendment, to move in that period where you went from legal to citizen to take some of the triggers that were at the end and move them much further up in the process, right? is we're leading up the process so it's much more front loaded than

cornyn: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: may i ask the chair how much time is remaining on this side? the presiding officer: 21 minutes. mr. cornyn: i'd yield myself up to 15 minutes. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cornyn: mr. president, i would join my colleague from utah in many of his remarks, if not all of his remarks, that i come here to speak on the pentdzing immigration bill more in disappointment -- pending immigration bill moo more in disappointment and than in anger because of the lost opportunity we had to come up with a bill that would actually do the job, restore relate and order to our -- restore legality and order to our broken immigration system, create a system of legal immigration that would benefit our economy and reflect our basic values. it's been since -- well five months since the gang of eight first released their framework of principles for immigration reform. and at the time they were saying many of the right things

john cornyn (r-texas) no podemos cambiarla porque 8 senadores se reunieron y decidieron lo que debia? es inaceptable. eso es exactamente lo que se supone debemos hacer aqui. activistas migratorios creen que esta enmienda lo que busca es frenar toda la reforma. ben monterroso, sindicato seiu lo que esto hace es ponerle muchos mas obstaculos al paso a la ciudadania. esta enmienda lo que esta haciendo es dejar a la gente en limbo, no vamos a dejar que ninguno se legalice hasta que las fronteras no esten completamente seguras, seguras para quien? standup: fernando pizarro, washington d.c. las votaciones se quedaron estancadas, lo que implica que al senado solo le quedan 2 semanas para debatir y votar sobre la aprobacion de 1 reforma para antes de las vacaciones del congreso del 4 de julio. desde washington, fernando pizarro, univision. ..en temas relacionados...una protesta contra la reforma migratoria se prepara para mediados del proximo mes. claudia uceda con los detalles de los preparativos de la manifestacion... aqui en los jardines del capitolioel 15 de juliose espera cientos de per

cornyn's amendment would also leave

cornyn: mr. president, would the senator yield for a question? mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: i'm happy to allow the colloquy between the two senators, questions or otherwise, but i have a consent agreement that senator grassley and i have been waiting here to do for some time, and so when we complete our work, i would hope the two senators would engage in whatever conversation they want. i have also been told that perhaps senator leahy, the manager of this bill, may want to say something. so, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the following amendments be in order to be called up before the senate. thune number 1197, vitter number 1228, landrieu number 1222, and landrieu number -- i'm sorry, and tester number 1198. that the time until 4:30 be equally divided between the two managers or their designees for debate on these amendments and that grassley amendment 1195 -- let's do that again, mr. president. that the time until 4:30 be equally di

cornyn: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be rescinded. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cornyn: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent to set aside the pending amendments and to call up my amendment number 1251. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from texas, mr. cornyn, for himself and others, proposes an amendment numbered 1251. mr. cornyn: mr. president, i ask consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cornyn: mr. president, i have been working on immigration policy for all the time i have been in the united states senate, about 10 years now, so i have some familiarity with the issues and the arguments that have been made and it's always amazing to hear a lot of the same arguments being repeated now that we have heard before in 2007 and before, but one of the differen

cornyn's amendments have been called a poison pill by harry reid. back to you. victoria, when do you reach the tipping point where the latino community and liberals and people who generally want to see better treatment of people who have been here a number of years, especially when they say i'm off the bus? >> you know, i think in terms of border security, latinos are on board with it. they understand that the united states is a sovereign country. they need to protect their borders. but what they don't like is the poison pill aspect of it that john cornyn is being disingenuous. he's not really concerned that the border is unsafe. for those of us who live on the border who have spent time on the border, you see the border. you see the troops. you see the border patrol there. it's secure. all right. we'll throw more money at it. but if you're doing something just to derail this, latinos will turn their back even more on the republican party. >> okay, thank you. i think you have nailed the politics of this pretty well. thank you, victoria di francesco soto and gove

cornyn's intention is to produce such a level of security standard that nobody could ever achieve it.e cause it poisoning the bill, the poison pill for the bill. i think what's problematic for the amendment is at the deter citizenship, which is part of the biggest part of the bill that most of us you are championing. with rubio supporting that as well, right? so there's a way in which the current big is being paused. he's trying to gain credibility for this amendment, i think it shows the schism you're talking about, but also how impossible it is for republicans to see, get together under this amazing moment and appeal to all americans and to understand that the change in demographics mean there's a new america that's happening. >> jimmy, salimisha mentions the role of marco rubio. how do you think marco rubio has been doing? >> he 'playing this down both sides of both middles. i've never seen a politician do this before, but i think -- he's continuing to work with the gang of eight, they know that, he knows that, yet he goes on fox three times a day and blasts the living held of the

you found a letter from john cornyn, a senator from texas.asking for a cdc grant and it will improve the health and quality of life for area residents. when you read this, it's just amazing. but tell us there are more letters. it's not just cornyn. >> he's the second most powerful republican in the senate, but these letters requesting obamacare or affordable care act money really go across the board in the republican caucus. he have freshmen, tea partyers committee chairs, the republicans are saying we got to repeal the entire bill, it's a monstrosity, but when the camera is away they're sending letters saying it's going to save life lives and improve health. >> michael: why the sudden love affair or is it not so sudden. >> republican staff members who--they're cordoned off from the politics on the hill, and they work with constituents every day, and they see this money as a great opportunity for people in their districts. they're going out with lawmakers writeing letters requesting funds. this is going to trained doctors to hope health clini

do you think that's what the cornyn amendment would do? >> i think definitely. i think one of the things that's so interesting is we talk about immigration as a complicated issue and it clearly is. one of the problems is, the republicans are trying to play politics as opposed to good policy so one of the things -- >> that never happens. >> never. it's like a magical strange thing. i can't imagine it ever happening. i mean, i think that's one of the things the republicans are trying to give themselves kov by being able to say we want to make sure we have security triggers involved here. but ultimately it's a completely unrealistic logic for immigration. we really need to have complicated conversations about how difficult it is to secure the border, to talk about border security in a realistic way that acknowledges the difficulties of this but instead we're going to have potentially incredibly bad policy. matt, when you look at senator cornyn's history here, you have someone stepping into the debate wanting to play a big role yet in 2007 with a republican-backed i

john cornyn, that's the essence of his amendment that was just tabled a little while ago. that's something that republicans in the house are demanding. yes, this does flood that zone with border patrol agents the way schumer described it, you can put a border patrol agent within 1,000 feet of each other along the southern border with the numbers they're talking about. the fact they never have to reach any measurement, any certification that the border is, in fact, secure before the undocumented immigrants can get their green cards and start applying for citizenship, that may still drive republicans away, so it's unclear. >> we saw a rally yesterday outside the capitol, tea party members saying they're just not going to support this. there's a theory the longer this legislation stays out there, the harder it gets to pass. alan, is that a big concern for supporters at this point? >> if we start talking about this thing going into 2014, absolutely. harry reid has said he wants this thing passed, out of the senate by the july 4th recess. this possibly gives the opportunity to

they said the cornyn bill would be too difficult.comes on the heels of cbo report that immigration would be beneficial for the economy. the idea here is all right if this is going to be beneficial to the economy overall, why don't we find some funds within the budget which can to be done when they really want to do it. it's a dirty secret here on capitol hill. why not find the funds to double the border patrol, get the 700 miles of fencing and in order to get that pathway to citizenship. folks are sort of saying that apieces both sides and honestly at the end of the day the political players in the gop that need though to happen who want to see their future election prospects more bountiful, they are pulling the strings a little bit on this as well. >> what's been the post-results of speaker boehner meeting with the hispanic caucus yesterday? >> from talking to folks they said it was productive, he heard them out and he understands the issue. boehner has been around here since 1990. he was involved in this to some degree when it was

cornyn took more than $48,000 from the judicial retirement system of texas.ore than $10,000 from the employees retirement system of texas. and more than $6,000 from the texas county and district retirement system. for a grand total of $65,380 in addition. all of this in retirement benefits last year. and he's collecting all of this while working as a senator making as a senator $174,000 a year. did mr. fiscal responsibility didn't think we'd see him taking state-funded benefits with bashing government spending? nice try, but take this three times. we got you got you got you. [ agent smith ] i've found software that intrigues me. it appears it's an agent of good. ♪ [ agent smith ] ge software connects patients to nurses to the right machines while dramatically reducing waiting time. [ telephone ringing ] now a waiting room is just a room. [ static warbles ] i got this. [thinking] is it that time? the son picks up the check? [thinking] i'm still working. he's retired. i hope he's saving. i hope he saved enough. who matters most to you says the most about you. a

cornyn: mr. president? the presiding officer: the republican whip. mr. cornyn: mr. president, this afternoon we will have an important vote, some might say even historic vote, on the motion to road to the immigration reform bill. i was here in 2007 the last time that subject was on the floor of the united states senate, and it proved to be a divisive and tough issue that we could not get through. but i think if there's one that uni sense in terms of my constituents in texas and really sort of the impression i get generally speaking, it is that the american people believe that the status quo on immigration is unacceptable. some of our colleagues have actually called the status quo de facto amnesty because essentially there's lawlessness in our broken immigration system and what we need to do is to restore law and order and predictability and to make sure that our immigration system works in the best interests of the united states. and that's true in a umin o numf ways that are included in the unde

you took a whack at senator jon cornyn, fellow republican. he seems to want 10,000 more border agents. you estimated that would cost 20 million and you said because you're not a bashful senator, you said we just can't afford that during the sequester. is that going to be a debate inside the gop? am i looking at a border security debate inside the republican party? >> well, i think -- and i respect senator cornyn, he's trying to improve border security, but here's one thing i want out of this bill. i want it to be deficit neutral. don't you? i don't want any more government programs that we borrow money from our kids and grandkids to pay for it. so right now i believe the bill is paid for. if you want to add more border security, fine. let's find a way to pay for. and if you want to add a new trigger that you can't adjust to citizenship until x is done, our democratic colleagues have to be convinced that republicans can't manipulate x and it's achievable. there's a lot of distrust. i would never grant legalization first and hope the afl-cio wo

a quick question about politics for senator cornyn. he does not give love from people from those up owning the bill. what is his logic? >> you get to answer that. >> why don't we take those? >> i want to say if i don't agree with the senator, it is important that he is involved in the debate and he is an important senator and represents a state that has a lot at stake in the immigration bill, and it is better now that he is actively and aggressively pursuing some public objectives than sitting on the sidelines. in that sense this is helpful, and in the amendment there is a series of things he is proposing about infrastructure investment that are usually critical to the u.s. and mexican economies that get adopted even if it does not get adopted. i am not character rising involvement as's it was characterized on sunday as toxic. we need him in the tent and hopefully we can work something out with him in the next couple weeks. his amendment is dead and we will see what happens. on the president, i think that the white house has made a dec

they said senator cornyn, he was overreaching, he wanted 5,000 new border agents. now the bill gets in trouble. they come in with 20,000 border agents. i think there was a political response to a failing piece of legislation, a dramatic, desperate attempt to pass a dramatic amendment so they can say, it does everything you want and more. >> jeff sessions was six seven years ago the last time immigration came to the senate, came to capitol hill, jeff sessions was arguing as vociferously against it. raul, do you think things feel different right now than they did the last time immigration came up and failed? >> yes, i think the calculus this time around is different because this time we have certain groups supporting immigration reform that were not on board the last time, such as the evangelical movement, high-tech sector. they were not on as board then as they are now. and there is definitely pressure to keep it going. jeff sessions is half correct in what he's saying here is that this compromise, it is totally driven by politics because if you look at it just in t

cornyn: i thank the senator. i honestly respect and value the work that the so-called gang of eight has done on this legislation, as well as the contributions made by my colleague from north dakota and from tennessee. i think they have moved this bill in a constructive direction to give people more confidence that we're actually serious about dealing with border security. but i want to ask them to distinguish, if they will, between the provision that they i know supported, both of them, in my amendment that was tabled earlier, which makes the progress from probationary status to green card contingent upon 100% situational awareness of the border and a 90% apprehension rate, which is defined as operational control. how does your amendment differ from that? my understanding just from -- and i know it hasn't been written yet or hasn't been completed yet. but my understanding is that senator schumer and the democrats would not agree to that. i know they object to it. senator schumer has been quite clear in his tellin

, cornyn. that's a list. there's another list -- chambliss-port man, vitter, vitter, vitter, tomby -- this list is a list of senators that they'd like to get a vote on their amendments. i am not topped them getting a -- i am not opposed to them getting a vote. what i am opposed to is this list, which is not senator. it is numbers of senators who have worked very hard to get bipartisan support for amendments that improve the underlying bill, which is going to pass. the bill is going to pass. it's either going to pass with 69 votes or 72 votes or 74 votes. there's no way this bill is not going to pass the senate. it is clear it's going to pass. people don't like that it's going to pass, but it is going it pass. so before it passes, i'm asking with all of my heart for consideration of amendments that have been brought with democrats and republicans working in good faith to make the bill better and to solve problems for our constituentconstituents in a, yr constituents are not trying to negotiate o

. >> i think senator cornyn has the key amendment to put us in a position where we can actually look at the american people with a straight face and say that we are going to secure the border. reporter: that amendment by john cornyn would force the department of homeland security to reach specific metrics, such as apprehension of at least 90% of all illegal border crossers for the overall stand. the key republican negotiator, senator marco rubio acknowledge that preventing a future wave of illegal immigration is critical to securing conservative support. >> we are going to do that is as part of this bill. because if we don't, it will not pass in the american people will not support it. reporter: rubio had some momentum after kelly ayotte backed the bill, helping the gang of eight edge closer to a filibuster proof majority. >> this is a thoughtful bipartisan solution to a tough problem. that is why i am going to supported. reporter: by the republicans are seizing on the fact that the sponsors will not say how many peoppe they expect to enter into the country. >> you don't know or you

jon: we saw the difference in viewpoints between yourself and texas senator john cornyn.ates here? i mean, do the states have any individual say in how some of these border control measures get put in place on their own respective borders? >> yes, they do. and in one of the provisions of the bill, if after five years we have not achieved certain goals, that there will be a commission to spend additional funds, and most of the members of that commission will be from states that are affected by or on the mexico southern border and some on our northern border. jon: so, again, you're confident that with this corker-hoeven amendment, that this thing will have the support in the senate to pass. what about the house? what are you thinking about its prospects there? >> first of all, this legislation already had enough votes, like 60 or 61. but we need as many as possible, particularly republican senators, to send the right message to the house of representatives. so in the house of representatives, i don't know. i can't predict. i do know that congressman paul ryan, our former vi

cornyn: mr. president? the presiding officer: the republican whip. mr. cornyn: i ask the quorum call be rescinded. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cornyn: i know things are speeding at -- seems like they're speeding by us at the speed of light on this bill. we've got an announcement of a breakthrough on the part of some of our colleagues that is going to give this bill the momentum to pass and come out of here with a bunch of votes. but i think there are some questions we need to ask first of all under the -- i see the distinguished chairman of the finance committee, he's probably looked at this. but the underlying bill provides that $8.3 billion is immediately appropriated as emergency spending to fund the trust fund that will fund at least some of the operations in this immigration reform bill. but when i started to look at it more closely and consider the fact even though the underlying bill had zero funds for new border patrol, this new bill, this new rul proposal i should say w

. >> reporter: texas senator john cornyn expressed frustration after his amendment calling for 5,000 border agents was labeled too expensive. >> i was told we don't need more boots, we need technology. now i find to my shock and amazement, the distinguished senator from arizona says we need 20,000 more border patrol! how much is it going to cost? that's the question. >> reporter: supporters say it is fully paid for and the senior arizona senator, a gang of eight member, responded today on fox. >> according to congressional budget office in the next 20 years, we're going to have $700 billion in additional revenue as a result of passage of this legislation because the jobs that it creates and the increase in our gross domestic product. >> reporter: at the white house, there's belief this is a big moment. >> this agreement would constitute a break through on the bipartisan effort and we applaud the tireless work that has gone into it and the broader effort. >> reporter: there's a reason a number of democrats will support the amendment, even if security isn't their top priority. the hope

. >> senator cornyn has the key amendment to put us in position where we can look at the american people with a straight face and say we are going to secure the border. >> reporter: that amendment by republican john cornyn would force department of homeland security to reach specific metrics, like apprehension of at least 90% of all illegal border crossers for the overall law to stand. the key republican negotiator acknowledged to fox's mike emanuel , a future waive of legal immigration is critical to support. >> it won't pass and american people won't support it. >> reporter: he has momentum after kelly ayotte backed the bell, helping them closer to a 60 vote filibuster majority. >> it is a thoughtful bipartisan solution to a tough problem. that's why i'm going to support it. >> reporter: other republicans are seizing on the fact sponsors won't say how many people they expect to enter into the country. >> why not? you don't know or you won't say? either one is an indictment of this monstrosity. >> reporter: it would take years before most could apply for citizenship, which is no cake wa

. >> that amendment by republican john cornyn would force the department of homeland security to reach specific metrics such as apprehension of at least 90% of all illegal border crossers for the overall law to stand. >> john: 90% border security. you know what that means? bring nine friends with you and you get in free! (laughter and applause) yes, that's the author you will be up one new country and down nine old friends. and it isn't just the content of the bill that republicans hate. >> this is not an easy bill to read. >> subparagraph capital "c" index -- the index calculated under this subparagraph for a current year equals the sum of subparagraph roman numeral i. >> i'm sure you know exactly what that means. >> jon: well, i don't know what it means, but to be fair i'm not a senator. you are. and legal jargon is kind of the official language of the senate. so if i may follow a page from your party's play book, learn to speak the language or go back to where you came from. (cheers and applause) to to sum up, still a lot of challenges ahead for this immigration bill to achieve its

quiero pasar una propuesta del senado, porque no va a pasar en la cÁmara el republicano por texas john cornynd en la frontera chltd >>> rubio ha negociado con el tejano. >>> crear una enmienda a la propuesta, que asegure la seguridad fronteriza no debemos pasarlo, tenemos que seguir trabajando. >>> elliot como ran pole, no quieren dejar cuando la frontera estÁ segura, quieren que la decisiÓn de pendz dpenda del co. >>> el senador rubio, estÁ optimista que con la enmienda que g busca, 20 de sus colegas en el senado estÉn dispuestos alea legalizar a 11 millones en washington, univisiÓn. >>> las a famosas deportaciones voluntarios que habla el gobierno son obligadas segÚn sostiene la uniÓn de libertades civiles. presentÓ una demanda federal contra el gobierno de estados unidos. argumentando que engaÑo a los inmigrantes manteniÉndolos en prisiÓn por largo tiempo. jaime garcÍa implica. >>> la salida vo luna tri y los indocumentados arrestados por fronterizos y la of de inmigraciÓn y aduanas conocido como ice u persona tiene derecho de hacer un derecho. al firmar este documento estÁ renunciando a e

cornyn: mr. president? the presiding officer: the republican whip. mr. cornyn: madam president there is first a matter of fairness when it comes to offering suggestions to amend legislation that's on the floor, and under the ordinary practices and procedures of the united states senate, the majority and the minority have an opportunity to offer amendments to modify the underlying bill. but on a subject as important and as fundamental to who we are as a country and to our country's future as immigration reform there have been nine amendments voted on on this bill in the last two weeks. nine amendments. to listen to our colleagues on the -- in the majority who are happy with the underlying bill because they wrote it they act like we've had a fullsome opportunity to offer amendments. but we have been willing to have votes so long as we get votes on our amendments. it's not just the majority that has the opportunity to modify the underlying legislation and to debate it. the my in order has rights too. and our side wants a right to choose our own amendments n

senator john cornyn is great senator from texas.udiciary committee member and we ought to write the toughest language we can come up with so we make sure that we don't have a flood of illegal immigrants all over again. his point that we can pass tough security and fix the problem, i don't know why anybody in the senate would be opposed to that. i don't know why any american would be opposed to it. >> patti ann: khuik schumer is part of that group of eight and he independents the border security concerns and he is expressing confidence they can find common ground. he also says you can't make the standard so unreasonable that the whole goal is to pork the bill -- what say you. >> for border security, border security means 100 percent none penetration. i think that is unrealistic. israelis has the toughest even a walls they built it's unrealistic. so i would like to see what the metrics are. i sympathize people that live near the border but we need to see the stronger metrics to say that border security will or will not make this bill.

i don't think john cornyn is.i think there are a number in the middle trying to look to get to a yes. >> uh-huh. >> and are going to need something more on boarder. probably that issue even more than coverage, you know, healthcare coverage down the road or anything like that. >> michael? >> i have to say and i would like your reaction from the real politic point of view rubio's real interest, his best outcome in terms of 2016 and running for president, which we know he wants to do his best outcome is that he is the guy who fails and tried. >> i don't know. i think he will look bad as a guy who fails. >> he can blame cornyn and others and the base and he will get credit in the media as the guy who tried to make the republican party comes to terms but yet, because it failed -- >> the base isn't going to turn out. they are going to hold him as squarely responsible for not being able to deliver a bill. he put himself out. we are talking about the latino community. who are you talking about? >> the right-wing. >> i don

with regard to senator cornyn's amendment that would add 5,000 agents and do some other thing, this is what senator schumer said back in the committee in may, just last month. "and what we've learned, and it was hit home to me when senator flake and senator mccain took me to arizona portion of the border, it's vast. we have more people on the border patrol. what's the number? 21,000. i think it was triple what it was five years ago. but you can't have -- if you want to have the whole federal budget, you guys figure out how you're going to spend and get that money, the whole federal budget on just the border patr patrol? you could probably have 100% operational control." so he's -- he was saying then, don't question our bill. it does all you need. we're going to have the money to spend more on it. and now apparently he's trumpeting the great bipartisan agreement that would add 20,000 more border patrol people. now, maybe we need more border patrol and we need to use technology and we need to use fences wisely. but what we really need is a secretary of homeland security who knows what th

other republicans like senator john cornyn of texas want things like a 100% situational awareness, 90% apprehension on the border. as we look at what senator rubio's motives are now, is he undermining the hard work of the immigration eight by entertaining these amendments or is this just politics as usual? >> thomas, i think it's actually more trying from marco rubio's perspective to strengthen the bill to get more republican support. the gang of eight is still together. i mean, there are sometimes it's been reported there's been a little of annoyance about some of the requests that senator marco rubio has made to have more security but it's been his goal to have more republicans in the debate, someone with his stature and association with the tea party and what he's been asking for time and time again is adding more border security to the proposal. now, what democrats say is that they don't want any type of trigger where that -- any type of the pathway to citizenship would be predetermined by having to meet all of these goals and where that path to citizenship might be jeopardized. so

cornyn's amendment expected to go to a vote today. the senate has voted down several border security amendments as you've seen put forward by republicans including a measure from kentucky senator rand paul on wednesday that would have required congress to certify that border security measures are being met before allowing undocumented immigrants to begin the legalization process. one senator who voted against it, florida's marco rubio. >> what i think you can expect to see tomorrow is a substantial improvement, a substantial improvement, in the border security parts of this bill. >> you said you'd secure the border first but a number of amendments have been voted on that would do just that, a couple yesterday, and you voted against them. >> the reason why is because i think the proposals need to go even further. >> pressure from conservatives on rubio. once a darling of the tea party. is increasing. on wednesday, he was mocked and booed by conservatives in a big rally that took place on capitol hill. >> what this bill does is takes a

with regard to senator cornyn's amendment that would add 5,000 agents and do some other thing, this is what senator schumer said back in the committee in may, just last month. "and what we've learned, and it was hit home to me when senator flake and senator mccain took me to arizona portion of the border, it's vast. we have more people on the border patrol. what's the number? 21,000. i think it was triple what it was five years ago. but you can't have -- if you want to have the whole federal budget, you guys figure out how you're going to spend and get that money, the whole federal budget on just the border patr patrol? you could probably have 100% operational control." so he's -- he was saying then, don't question our bill. it does all you need. we're going to have the money to spend more on it. and now apparently he's trumpeting the great bipartisan agreement that would add 20,000 more border patrol people. now, maybe we need more border patrol and we need to use technology and we need to use fences wisely. but what we really need is a secretary of homeland security who knows what th

senator cornyn in 2007 spent a lot of time working on this bill. he proposed an amendment that would improve the border enforcement and he is a senator from texas who's wrestled with this over the years and he should absolutely be listened to. who else to know people out there every day enforcing the law, telling us the system is not working and it changes and improvements need to be affected and they are concerned this bill doesn't do it. mr. president, the rocking him county sheriff's office on june 10 on north carolina issued a news release that more than 75 north carolina sheriffs warn congress the senate immigration bill would endanger the public. well, that is a pretty serious matter. they say, quote, and a short time over 75 sheriffs across north carolina served in counties both big and small across this great, great state have signed the attached letter opposing the current senate immigration plan. our first responsibility and highest duties is to provide for the safety of the citizens residing in communities where we serve. unfortunately,

cornyn: mr. president? the presiding officer: the republican whip. mr. cornyn: mr. president, we obviously are talking about immigration this week and last week and next week. i am one of those who, after many years working on this subject, i hope we are successful in passing what i believe is good, credible immigration reform. i've come to the conclusion, like many americans, that the status quo is simply unacceptable. i've talked a little bit about some of the bodies and unmarked graves that i witnessed myself in brooks county, texas, where under the current broken system people come across the border from faraway lands only to die trying to get into this country and be buried in unmarked graves in places like brooks county. i've met with a young woman who was prostituted after having been brought into the united states from central america, where she worked in a houston nightclub, where she was basically held as an indentured servant or slave because she knew that she was vulnerable to deportation and so the person who brought her there and put her in that situat

john cornyn now is pushing the amendment that would basically require the wall to be complete with --le, there's -- also, that -- guarantee that, i think, 90% of the people who get across it somehow are apprehended. so it looks like border security -- it looks like sort of a -- none of the immigration reform, none of the path to citizenship would be secured unless boarders were met. they are setting impossible standard for triggering the path to citizenship. >> yes. any republicans for a while have been talking about sort of enforce many only or enforcement first. like you said, think it is an impossible standard that many democrats won't go along with. in the senate i don't see that going forward. the house certainly this is going to be very popular which is why raul labrador pulling out of the gang of eight, people wringing their hands over the that. i was skeptical how far the gang of eight would be going in the house. talked to a house democratic member who said have you looked at the makeup of house? this will not go anywhere. i think that is something popular. you will see it be

cornyn: i would ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be rescinded. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cornyn: madam president, i have come to the floor to say a few words about rosa boren export, the russian state arms dealer that has been supplying the syrian government with deadly weapons and facilitating mass murder. last november, i sponsored an amendment to prohibit the use of taxpayer dollars in america to enter into contracts or agreements with rosa boren export. my amendment had strong bipartisan support and it passed unanimously. and yet just yesterday as president obama met with russian leader vladimir putin at the g-8 summit in northern ireland, we learned that the pentagon has signed a brand-new $572 million contract with rosa boren export to buy mi-17 helicopters for the afghan army. so how did the obama administration get around the prohibition in my amendment? well, they argued that the rosa boren export contract was in our national security interests. in other words, they want us to believe that we're promoting united state