Richard Durbin

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to speak about the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program, known as DACA. That was an Executive order of President Obama's which provided temporary legal status to immigrant students and young people if they registered with the government, paid a fee, and passed a criminal and national security background check. It was for 2 years and renewable. Young people who are protected by DACA are known by some as Dreamers. They came to the United States as children. They grew up singing the ``Star Spangled Banner'' and pledging allegiance to our flag. They believed that they were Americans, but legally, they are not. The average DACA recipient came to the United States at the age of 6 and has been here for approximately 20 years. It was 7 years ago that I sent a letter to President Obama. I was joined in that letter, incidentally, by Senator Dick Lugar, a Republican from Indiana. In that letter, I asked President Obama: Can you find a way to protect these young people? We passed the Dream Act on the floor of the House. We passed it on the floor of the Senate. We have never managed to pass it in both Chambers in the same year. And the President created the DACA Program. The DACA Program has been a success. Approximately 800,000 Dreamers have come forward and received DACA protection. Let's allow them to be part of America as teachers, as nurses, as engineers, as first responders, and even serving in the U.S. military. But on September 5 of this last year, 2017, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced that the Trump administration was setting out to repeal DACA, to put an end to it. That same day, President Trump called on Congress to come up with a solution to legalize DACA. He challenged us. He said to the U.S. Senate and House: Pass a law. If this is a good idea, pass a law. It has been more than 4 months since the President issued that challenge. The Republican leadership of Congress has not proposed any legislation to legalize DACA as the President asked. The deportation clock is ticking for these young people who are protected. Already, 15,000 have lost their DACA status. Beginning on March 5--the deadline that initially was imposed by President Trump-- every day for the next 2 years, 1,000 DACA young people will lose their ability to work legally in the United States and will be subject to being deported from this country. Who are they? Some 20,000 of them are teachers in our schools who would lose the right to work legally and have to leave their classrooms. Nurses would leave their patients. First responders would leave their posts. And 900 soldiers would lose their ability to volunteer to risk their lives for America's future. This isn't just a looming humanitarian crisis; it is an economic crisis. More than 91 percent of DACA Dreamers are gainfully employed and paying taxes. Many of them are students; yet they are still gainfully employed because they don't qualify for Federal assistance for higher education, so they have to work jobs, sometimes many jobs. The nonpartisan Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy reports that DACA-eligible individuals contribute an estimated $2 billion a year in State and local taxes. The Cato Institute, a conservative operation in Washington, estimates that ending DACA and deporting DACA recipients will cost the economy $60 billion and result in a $280 billion reduction in economic growth over the next decade. Poll after poll shows overwhelming bipartisan support for the Dreamers. FOX News found that 79 percent of Americans support a path to citizenship for Dreamers, including 63 percent of Trump voters. The answer is clear. It was 16 years ago that I first introduced the DREAM Act--bipartisan legislation to give these young people a path to citizenship. In July of last year, I introduced the most recent version with my colleague, Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. We need to pass the Dream Act, and we need to do it now, before January 19. Over the years, I have come to the floor to tell the story of the Dreamers. I can give a pretty nice speech here, but these stories tell the story of this issue more than anything I can add to them. These stories show what is at stake when we consider the fate of DACA and the Dream Act. Today, I want to tell you about this young lady. Her name is Evelyn Valdez-Ward. This is the 107th Dreamer story I have told on the floor. Evelyn was 6 months old when her family brought her from Mexico to Houston, TX. She was quite a good student. She graduated 11th in her high school class of 650. She took all advanced placement classes and was a member of the National Honor Society. She was a member of the color guard in the marching band and regularly volunteered at homeless shelters and animal shelters. It wasn't until she began to apply for college that she finally learned her immigration status. She wasn't like the other students with whom she had grown up and shared classrooms and experiences. Evelyn is undocumented, but it didn't stop her--she was going to pursue college. One of her teachers believed in her because she was such a bright student and wrote her a letter of recommendation to go to college. She was accepted into the University of Houston. She received multiple awards while in college, including the Excellence in SI Leadership and Mentoring Award, the American Society of Plant Biology Award for Outstanding Research, and the Outstanding Biology Leadership Award. The summer after her freshman year, she was offered a great research opportunity through the National Science Foundation. Because of DACA, she was allowed to work legally in the United States, and she was able to pursue this important research. That opportunity was in plant water transport research in California. This is where Evelyn fell in love with ecology and plants. She graduated magna cum laude in 2016 with a bachelor of science in biology. Today, she is a second-year Ph.D. student at the University of California, Irvine, in the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. She is researching the effects of climate change on the interactions between plants and soil. Evelyn's dream is to continue her research as a scientist and to become an advocate for strategies to mitigate climate change. In September, the American Association for the Advancement of Science wrote a letter opposing the White House decision to rescind DACA. Here is what they said: Many DACA students make significant contributions to the scientific and engineering enterprise in the United States . . . high-achieving young people in DACA contribute in many ways to our nation. Many are studying to become scientists, engineers, medical doctors and entrepreneurs. Given the administration's decision, we urge Congress to craft legislation that provides long-term protection for these young people who seek to continue their education and contribute to society. . . . Our nation needs an immigration policy that advances U.S. innovation and prosperity, and stays true to foundational American goals that seek contributions to society from all. The Presiding Officer and I had a unique invitation yesterday. I would just say that as a Member of the House and of the Senate, I have never been invited to a meeting quite like the one we had yesterday with the President in the Cabinet Room of the White House. It was the President's idea. I don't know if it was a spur-of-the-moment idea, but it is one that came together very quickly in a few days. I think there were almost 26 of us--Democrats, Republicans, House and Senate Members--who were called together by President Trump. I was kind of surprised, but there I was sitting right next to the President of the United States. It was only the third time we had ever spoken. The other two times, incidentally, were about DACA and the Dream Act, as you can probably guess. He invited me to sit next to him as we talked about this issue. Then he did something that was really unusual. I have been to some meetings with the President in the Cabinet Room with President Obama and President George W. Bush. Usually, what happens is, the cameras come in, the President says a few words, then the staff tells them to leave, and they reluctantly pull out and leave. Yesterday was quite different. The President told the press they could stay, and they did, for almost an hour. The conversations between the President of the United States and Members of Congress were shared with the American people. I had never seen anything quite like it. I kind of liked it, to be honest with you. I think there was a lot of candor in the room. People were expressing their points of view, and there were many different points of view, but I think I came away from that meeting with more hope than ever that we can do something about DACA and the Dream Act. The President told us he would like to see it done. He added, though, there were things he wanted to be a part of it. One of them dealt with border security, which has been a priority for all of us from the beginning. We want to establish--both political parties want to establish that we are committed to border security, and we are. How you define it, what it costs, and how it is implemented--some of these things we can define in our agreement; others will be left to future efforts by Congress and the President. Then he talked about the family unification, and that is an issue that is very delicate. It is one that, as my colleagues can imagine, really hits home. It is very personal as to whether a member of a family can bring someone they love--some relative in their family--to the United States. Even if they decide to bring them--incidentally, they may be waiting 30 years, in the case of those who are seeking entry into the United States through family visas; 80 years, from China; 160 years from Mexico. Some of these things are unrealistic and will never happen, but to talk about family unification really strikes home with a lot of families. I want to hear the President's point of view, but I want to deal with this in the most sensitive and sincere way. We don't want to flood the United States with people who are any danger to us, No. 1, or nonproductive citizens, but we certainly want to see families unified. There is a question about diversity visas. I will not go into it because it is a long story--the creation of this program, where it is today, and where it might be in the future. Here is what I do believe after yesterday's meeting. I believe President Donald Trump called for that meeting because he wanted to let the American people know he was serious. He wanted to show them he could be a President presiding over a table with 24, 25 Members of Congress from both political parties and tackle a sensitive, delicate, challenging issue. He wants to show the American people he can lead. I want to help him lead if the goal is to make sure DACA and the Dreamers ultimately have their chance to be part of America's future. I am willing to work in good faith with the President to compromise, whatever it takes, to bring this forward. There are so many lives hanging in the balance, and this is one of them--this wonderful, brilliant young woman who wants to make not only the world a better place but America a better place. She simply wants the chance to be here and be part of America's future. We can give her no less. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker) is necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker) is necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Donnelly) and the Senator from Montana (Mr. Tester) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, years ago, a man with a famous name aspired to be President of the United States. Critics dismissed this idea as ridiculous. One of the leading political columnists of the day wrote that the man's initials stood for ``Feather Duster Roosevelt, a lightweight''--nothing to him. Al Franken's decision to run for a seat in this Senate from Minnesota was met in many quarters with the same sort of mockery. Many people said: He is a comedian. He doesn't have the knowledge or the skill or the patience or the vision to be a lawmaker. You can't joke your way into the Senate. The pundits were wrong about FDR. He was one of our greatest Presidents during one of our darkest hours. Madam President, the doubters were wrong about Al Franken too. Al Franken has been my friend, my personal friend, for more than two decades. For the last 7-plus years, he has been my colleague in the Senate. He has been a credit to the Senate, a passionate advocate for his home State of Minnesota, a defender of our Constitution, and a determined fighter for justice. He became a better Senator every year. His work in the Senate has made life for millions of people better in Minnesota and far beyond. He and his dedicated staff can take pride in that fact. Al Franken has been and I am sure will continue to be an effective champion for those whose daily struggles too often go unnoticed and unaddressed in the places of power. During his time in the Senate, Al Franken has always been there when his Senate colleagues asked for help. He was one of the most sought- after voices in our party. He never failed to pack a bag, catch a plane, and spend another night away from his family to help each and every one of us. Twenty years ago, when I first met him, he was this well known, successful comedian on ``Saturday Night Live'' who happened to play the role of a fellow named Paul Simon, a Senator from Illinois who was my predecessor. Paul Simon invited Al Franken to come to Makanda, IL. It is not even close to Chicago. He agreed on a Sunday afternoon to be there on behalf of my campaign, although we had never met, and he came. He limped onto Paul Simon's front porch, saying: ``I twisted my ankle playing squash.'' I thought it was another perfect example of a reason he could have used to avoid the invitation, but he came anyway. We had a great afternoon and a terrific time with Paul Simon of ``Saturday Night Live'' and the real Paul Simon and a senatorial candidate who was grateful for Al Franken's presence that day. When people ask me to describe my politics, I say that I follow the gospel of St. Paul. By that, I mean I try to emulate three of my greatest political heroes, who happen to share that name. The first Senator, Paul Douglas of Illinois, was a champion of honesty, economic justice, and civil rights, and the man for whom I had the good fortune of interning when I was a college student; Paul Simon, whom I just mentioned, my predecessor from Illinois, who was one of the smartest, most decent men I have ever met in any walk of life; and Senator Paul Wellstone of Minnesota, who has received many deserved tributes today. Paul Wellstone was the champion of farmers, hotel maids, grocery clerks, cafeteria workers, and everyone who worked hard and struggled for dignity and enough money just to pay the bills. Paul Wellstone, as we have heard from both Senator Klobuchar and from Al Franken himself, is the man Al Franken chose to emulate in public life. He stated Paul Wellstone's famous quote: ``We all do better when we all do better.'' It is a simple statement, a profound truth, and it has been the guiding light for Al Franken's Senate career. Senator Wellstone died 15 years ago in a tragic plane crash. On the 10th anniversary of that terrible loss, Senator Franken wrote an essay about Paul Wellstone's legacy for The Atlantic magazine. I want to read a short section from that essay. Senator Franken wrote: One of Paul's most famous quotes is this: ``Politics is not about power. Politics is not about money. Politics is not about winning for the sake of winning. Politics is about the improvement of people's lives.'' That quote is often used to criticize those on the other side who seem to forget the human consequences of their political agenda. But progressives should keep it in mind, as well. The big fights--war and peace, justice and liberty--are important. But there aren't any small fights. And where Paul made the biggest impact--where his work resulted in the greatest improvement of people's lives--was on issues that don't usually lead anyone's stump speech: mental health, domestic violence, homelessness among veterans. When future historians look back at the legacy of Senator Al Franken, I believe they will say: Here is a man who loved his State and his country, who worked hard to be a good Senator, and who never hesitated to take up an important issue, large or small. Al Franken and I served together on the Senate Judiciary Committee. Over the years, I have watched him mature into one of the best, most insightful questioners on that committee. His questioning of Supreme Court Nominee Gorsuch, now Supreme Court Justice Gorsuch, helped to expose the Justice's troubling record of ruling against workers and families. It was a story about a truckdriver who deserted his position on the roadway, was freezing in the middle of the night, who finally got his day in court, and the decision by Judge Gorsuch at the time, in my opinion and Al's opinion, did not serve justice. Many of us raised that issue; no one raised it more effectively than Al Franken. His probing questioning also exposed Attorney General Sessions for misleading America about his meetings with Russians during the 2016 Presidential campaign. He has been equally effective on the HELP Committee. His questioning of the future Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos, showed her to be unfamiliar with some of the most basic and important debates in education policy and clearly exposed the fact that she was unready to serve as our Nation's leader at the Department of Education. I guess some people seek elected office to make a name for themselves, but Al Franken didn't need to be a Senator to achieve that. He already had a well-known name as an entertainer, radio host, and best-selling author before he entered politics. He and his wife Franni have a good life, two great kids, and wonderful grandchildren who followed.

Mr. DURBIN. ``Terrific'' is the word. Terrific grandchildren who followed. When it came down to it, Al Franken wanted to do more than just entertain and be well known; he wanted to make a difference in the lives of others. More than anyone, as he said this morning, his wife Franni inspired him. As he explained in his book, her family wasn't as lucky as a lot of us. Her dad died when she was a young baby girl. Her mom raised five kids on Social Security survivor benefits and a paycheck from a local supermarket. But every member of Franni's family made it to the middle class because of Social Security, Pell grants, the GI bill, and title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Al writes: They tell you in this country you have to pull yourself up by your bootstraps. And we all believe that. But first you've got to have the boots. And the federal government gave Franni's family the boots. ``Opportunity is supposed to be for everyone.'' That is one of the articles of faith animating everything that Al Franken has done or sought to achieve in the Senate. I am going to miss my friend Al Franken, my colleague, and one of my fellow members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. I am sorry he is leaving under these circumstances, but he is going to be remembered, and he is going to have an opportunity to use his voice for others in the future. Every person who has ever lived has had moments they wish they could erase and words they wish they could take back. In this life of both calm and stormy seas, we all draw strength from the healing power of redemption, and we can take heart in the knowledge that tomorrow is another day with new opportunities to offer a helping hand and make our lives count. I am happy to hear Al Franken say that while he may be giving up the Senate, he is not giving up his voice in public life. I wish Al Franken, Franni, and their great family the very best and thank them again for what they have given to all of us. Madam President, I yield.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Colorado. We have been engaged in this battle of immigration reform for years. He is a worthy ally, thoughtful, and always thinking of a solution. I thank him for his continuing commitment to this cause. In the midst of the Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln got so frustrated with General McClellan that he sent him a message. He couldn't get him to attack. He wouldn't do anything. He asked: General McClellan, if you are not going to use your Army, can I use it? Can I borrow your Army? So I would like to ask the leaders of the House and Senate: If you are not going to use your Congress, can I borrow it for a minute? Can we fill up this empty Chamber and actually have a real debate over a real bill to solve a real problem? I think that might be a worthy thing for us to do. In fact, I think that is what we are paid to do; isn't it? Didn't we swear to uphold this Constitution? Didn't we take this historic job on with the goal of making America a better place? On September 5, President Trump, along with Attorney General Sessions, eliminated the DACA Program. This was a program that gave to almost 800,000 young people--brought to the United States when they were little kids--a chance to go to school, to work, to have futures in this country. They had to go through criminal background checks, turn over all of their information, and pay their taxes--all of the above. Then, for 2 years, they could operate in America. They were not citizens, but they were legally in America. On September 5, President Trump and Attorney General Sessions said: It is over--as of March 5, 2018, no more. Then the President said: I challenge you, Congress. Do something about it. Pass a law. That was almost 4 months ago. What have we done in 4 months to address this problem that affects the lives of 800,000 DACA-protected young people? Nothing. We are not using this Congress. General McClellan was not using the Army. Isn't it time that we do something? Wouldn't the American people be so pleasantly surprised if we did something on a bipartisan basis that solved a problem in America? I know my Republican colleagues are euphoric over their tax bill. Two out of three Americans are not. I am not. I will put it aside for a minute. They spent a lot of time. They passed it. So be it. They did it on a strictly partisan basis. They had a right under the Senate rules to do it that way, and they did it that way. This cannot be done on a strictly partisan basis. You cannot fix the immigration system unless you engage both political parties in the solution. I am lucky. I care about this. I also found some Republican Senators who care just as much. Jeff Flake of Arizona announced his retirement. I am sorry to see him go because he is a good person of good values. He stepped up and cosponsored the Dream Act that we are talking about here. I didn't even have to call him on the phone. I thanked him, and he said: It is the right thing to do. Lindsey Graham, a Republican of South Carolina, was my cosponsor. Cory Gardner of Colorado and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska stepped up and said: It is the right thing to do for these young people, to give them an opportunity to earn their way into legal status, to earn their way to citizenship. I thank them for that. We need eight more. If we get 8 more, we will have 12 Republicans out of 52. With eight more, we are ready. We are ready to put 60 votes up when they call the roll. With 60 votes in the Senate, you can get things done. What has happened? What opportunities have we had in the almost 4 months since the President eliminated this program? None--not one. Senator McConnell said to Senator Flake when his vote on the tax bill was in doubt: I promise you that we will bring this up in January--this coming January. I can tell you that I read the promise very closely, and there are a lot of contingencies on there. I hope that Senator McConnell is going to give us our chance early in January to find out if we can come up with a bipartisan solution to this problem. If you think there aren't other Republicans who support this, 34 Republicans in the House of Representatives sent a letter to Speaker Paul Ryan and wrote: Pass the Dreamer legislation this year--34 Republicans. So we are not alone. They are not the only ones. Yesterday, 11 Governors--11 of them, Republicans and Democrats--sent a letter to Congress, calling on us to do this. The letter was signed by the Democratic Governors from Minnesota, Montana, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina and by the Republican Governors from Nevada, Massachusetts, Vermont, and Utah, and by Alaska's Independent Governor. We are hearing from those in the business community. They want this done. They have seen these Dreamers. They have seen these young people. They believe in them, and they want us to do something to help them. We have heard it from the labor organizations, and we have heard it from the faith organizations. Across the board, 76 percent of the American people support what we are trying to do here--76 percent. What issues get 76 percent? The flag? I will bet you it gets even more, but not many others get 76 percent approval, including 61 percent of the Trump voters. They think it is the right thing to do. Do you know why? Because many of these people have met the Dreamers. When you come to know them and hear their stories, you come to the conclusion--at least I do--that, for goodness' sake, these are extraordinary young people. Somehow or another, they have survived and have even flourished in a country that doesn't recognize them as legal. They went to our schools. They pledged allegiance to our flag. They sang the national anthem. That is the country they know. Let me tell you about one before I turn the floor over to my colleague from Maryland. This young lady's name is Miriam Gonzalez. She is the 105th Dreamer whose story I have told on the floor. When she was 6 years old, her family brought her to the United States from Mexico, and she grew up near Los Angeles. She was a good student and a good athlete. In high school she played softball and golf. She was a member of the bible club, the chemistry club, and the reading club. She was an active volunteer in her community, including assistant teaching at the local elementary school. She was the valedictorian of her high school class. She was accepted at UCLA. She majored in anthropology and minored in classical civilization. Let me give a postscript here. If you are undocumented and go to college in America, you get no Federal assistance--no Pell grant, no Federal loan. You have to earn the money. You have to work jobs to do it. She did. She held down the necessary jobs and commuted to school from her parents' home by taking public transportation for 2 hours each way on every schoolday. She was involved in student groups, mentored students at Van Nuys High School, and encouraged them to go to college. She continued to excel academically. She made the dean's honor roll and was awarded a certificate for her research at UCLA. Today, she is assisting students in low-income neighborhoods and schools. After graduation, she went to work with Teach For America. Do you know what that means? It means taking a job that pays hardly anything to teach in one of the most challenging schools in America. She did it. She taught seventh- and eighth-grade students in L.A. She teaches five classes for students who are having trouble with math and reading, and she gives one-on-one tutoring. She is involved in the school's parents committee and tries to get the parents of these kids who need their helping hands to excel as well. She is a full-time graduate student at Loyola Marymount University, where she is pursuing a master's degree in education. I am going to read her letter and then turn over the floor. Every day for [my] first two months [as a teacher] my students would ask me if I would be returning the next day, week, and month, and I would reassure them that I was there to stay. Eventually, they began to trust me and believe that I was there to support them. . . . Now students believe that I am there for them and truly care about helping and preparing [them] to succeed academically. My students have made huge improvements academically, [and] I am particularly proud of how hard they all work. After hearing about the fate of DACA-- She is talking about President Trump abolishing DACA-- my students were worried that they would be losing me. I continue to reassure them that I am not going anywhere anytime soon and will fight to be able to see them finish middle school. What is going to happen to her if we don't do what we are supposed to do--if we don't use this Senate and that House to solve this problem? What is going to happen to her and her students? Are we so busy? Do you notice it on the floor? Are we so busy that we can't take up a piece of legislation here, debate it, and pass it today? Before the end of the day, we are going to pass a measure to keep the government open and functioning for about 3 or 4 weeks. It is something that may pass the House. We will find out later this afternoon. I am troubled by it. It doesn't have one word in it to deal with this challenge, and we have known for 4 months that it was coming and that we had to do it. I am going to be voting no on that, and it is not because of the merits of the continuing resolution. Until we address this issue and take the time to use the Senate and use the House to solve this problem, I am not going to be standing here and saying: I am going home for Christmas. I don't know what is going to happen to Miriam. I don't know what is going to happen to 800,000 others--get back to you later. The time is now for us to solve this problem. I yield the floor.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I would like to take a moment to acknowledge an extraordinary woman from my home State of Illinois. Heather Gooze lives in Nevada now, but she grew up in the Chicago area. She is a survivor of the worst mass shooting in modern American history. On October 1, she was working as a bartender at the Route 91 Harvest Festival in Las Vegas. She was there when a gunman with his own private arsenal rained down gunfire from a high-rise hotel, murdering 58 innocent people and injuring more than 500 others. Ms. Gooze testified at a recent Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on ``bump stocks,'' the $200 accessory that the Las Vegas gunman used to make his assault rifles fire almost as fast as a machine gun. When she heard the first round of shots, Heather thought it might have been fireworks, but suddenly people were running in every direction. Some were shot; many were covered in blood. Heather directed wounded and frightened people to an exit. With about 20 other people, she then pushed down a fence to make it easier for people to escape the gunfire. She could have run to safety herself. Instead, she went back to the bar to try to help people who had been shot and lay wounded on the ground. One young man had been shot in the head. Heather held a jean jacket to his wound to try to staunch the bleeding. When she dropped the jacket, she used her fingers to try to plug the hole in the young man's head. He died the next day. She then saw three men trying to move another badly injured man using a metal ladder as a stretcher. Heather reached out to grab a corner of the ladder and help lift it. The young man on the ladder grabbed her hand, squeezed it lightly, and then let go--dead. Heather looked around, saw other dead bodies lying alone, and decided that she would not leave that young man alone like that. She stayed with his body for hours, until 3:30 in the morning. When his cell phone rang, she answered. She told the young man's mother that her only child had died. The young man's girlfriend had escaped the killing field to the safety of a nearby hotel. Heather told her that young woman that the love of her life was gone, but Heather would stay with him and learn for the family where his body would be taken. At the recent hearing, Heather said that horrific night in Las Vegas made her part of a growing, grieving ``family'' she had hoped never to join: the American family of survivors and victims of mass shootings. She said that she has asked herself many times in the days after the shooting why she stayed and risked her life for young men she didn't know and for their grieving families. She said the only answer she could come up with was that she hoped that someone would do the same for her and not leave her alone in the midst of a massacre. I think that is the same plea that many Americans have for this Congress. They understand that gun safety is a politically heated issue. They understand that there are constitutional and legal questions that are difficult to balance. They want us to have the courage to take up that debate rationally, responsibly and respectfully. On an average day, 93 Americans are killed with guns--93 people a day, every day. Over 30,000 Americans a year die from guns. Many more live in daily fear that they could be next. I hope that we can agree to be more like Heather Gooze, to not abandon our fellow Americans to face that danger and fear of gun violence alone. Supporting Senator Feinstein's bill to ban the sale of ``bump stocks'' would be a good place to start.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I would like to take a moment to acknowledge the remarkable courage of a woman from my home State of Illinois. Her name is Angela McQueen--``Angie'' to her friends and family. Ms. McQueen teaches math and physical education at Mattoon High School in central Illinois. In late September, she was in the high school cafeteria when she saw a student pull a semiautomatic handgun from his backpack and start spraying the cafeteria with gunfire. Ms. McQueen and other teachers at the high school had recently been trained on what to do when faced with the threat of gun violence at school. It is sad and distressing to think that teachers need such training today, but that is, sadly, the reality. Thank goodness Angie McQueen had that training. The instant she saw the gun, she lunged and pushed the young man's hand towards the ceiling so he couldn't shoot others. She said she had only one thought in her head as she acted, as she put it, ``You're not going to do this to my kids.'' Hundreds of students were in the cafeteria at the time. One student was shot and hospitalized briefly, and another student suffered minor injuries when he was apparently grazed by gunfire. School and law enforcement officials say that Ms. McQueen's selfless actions likely saved students' lives. One student who witnessed the incident told a reporter for a local newspaper, ``Ms. McQueen is like Chuck Norris, basically. She's a hero.'' Angela McQueen is the daughter of two retired teachers. In her biography on the school's website, she was asked to describe why she became a teacher. The first reason she gave: ``I wanted to make the world a better place.'' She has certainly done that. Ms. McQueen is modest. She doesn't like being in the spotlight, but she recently allowed the city and families of Mattoon to thank her publicly at a reception at the school. Mattoon School superintendent Larry Lilly undoubtedly spoke for many when he said, ``We are forever grateful to Angela for her courageous actions that saved the lives of our kids. She was a ray of light in our darkest hour.'' ``You're not going to do this to my kids.'' That was what Angela McQueen vowed before she risked her life to disarm a young man with a semiautomatic handgun. I hope that all Members of Congress will take those words to heart as we debate gun safety and what we can do as a society to protect our children and all Americans from gun violence. Mr LEAHY Mr. President, we are a Nation of immigrants. That should be an obvious point, but it bears repeating at a time when our President sees political advantage in trafficking in xenophobic scapegoating. Unless you are Native American, you come from a line of people who come from somewhere else. Indeed, that simple fact is an integral part of the American story. We are also a nation that believes that anything is possible. Our ancestors and relatives journeyed here because, in America, where you come from does not determine what you can accomplish. In this great country, as long as you work hard and play by the rules, you can achieve your dreams. That itself is the American Dream. No single group of people embodies these ideals more than our Nation's Dreamers. Dreamers grew up in this country; they were brought here as children. They seek only the opportunity to contribute to our Nation and to be legally recognized as the Americans that they are. Dreamers are our neighbors, our teachers, and our first responders. Nearly a thousand Dreamers serve in our Armed Forces, risking their lives to defend the only country they have ever known as home. We cannot in good faith claim to care about the American Dream if we neglect to protect the very people who are living it. Take, for example, Dr. Juan Conde, a DACA recipient and a resident of Vermont. Dr. Conde was born in Mexico and brought to the United States as a child by his mother. In 2007, his mother was tragically taken by cancer. Showing remarkable courage and determination for a young man, this tragedy inspired Dr. Conde to find a way to help cancer patients like his mother; yet he was unable to become an oncologist due to his immigration status. So instead, he decided to obtain a Ph.D. in cancer research from the University of Texas. Dr. Conde wanted to treat cancer patients, not just study the disease. After receiving DACA status in 2012, he was empowered to pursue his medical degree. He is currently a medical student at University of Vermont's Lanier College of Medicine. Dr. Conde hopes to spend his life in the United States treating cancer patients and helping to find a cure for the disease. My hope is that we can make that happen, not just for Dr. Conde but for every other Dreamer. There are almost 800,000 Dreamers like Dr. Conde, all of whom have just as much potential to make our communities and our country truly great. To deny them these opportunities because they were brought here as children is as senseless as it is cruel. Yet that is the decision the president made. He could have worked with Congress to find a permanent solution for Dreamers while leaving DACA protections in place. Instead, he cast them aside. His administration has made absurd, nonfactual, and offensive arguments in support of that decision ever since. When Attorney General Sessions announced that DACA was being terminated, he argued that the program was an example of the Obama administration's repeated failure to enforce our immigration laws. He argued that such failure caused crime, violence, and even terrorism. During Senate Judiciary Committee hearings, I pressed both the Attorney General and his Department on this point, to name just one Dreamer who was involved in terrorist activity. Of course, they could not, but apparently, fear-mongering is more effective than acknowledging simple truths. By definition, Dreamers are law-abiding. They seek nothing more than to contribute to our country. If the President refuses to stand with Dreamers, then Congress must. We have done it before in the Senate. Four years ago, 68 Senators, Democrats and Republicans, voted for comprehensive immigration reform legislation that I managed on the Senate floor. That legislation included key protections for Dreamers, including an expedited pathway to citizenship. It is time for the Senate to act again now and for the House to follow suit. The future of Dreamers and the fate of the American Dream itself lies in our hands.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I rise today to speak to an issue that I have spoken to many times on the floor of the Senate. It is the issue of the DREAM Act, a measure which I introduced in the Senate 16 years ago. Sixteen years ago I tried to find a way to give young people brought into the United States, who grew up here in this country but did not have legal status, a chance--just a chance--to earn their way to legal status, to earn their way to citizenship. We set a number of hurdles in their path. We made it clear that they had to complete their education. We made it clear that they had to pass a serious criminal background check. We gave a timetable when they would be able to reach legal status and not fear deportation. That was 16 years ago, and it still is not the law of the land. Unfortunately, there are hundreds of thousands of young people who fit the description that I have just given. When President Obama was in the White House, I wrote him a letter and said: Mr. President, can you do something to help them? And he did. He created something called DACA, or Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. It was an Executive order that said to these young people: If you fit that definition of the DREAM Act and if you will come forward and pay a filing fee of $500 or more, if you will submit yourself to a criminal background check and give us all of your background information about you and your family, then, we will give you temporary, renewable status to stay in America, not be deported, and be allowed to work. It was a big leap for many of these young people to do it because they had grown up in families where, in whispered conversations in the evening, their parents told them: Be careful. If you get arrested and they come to see this family, many of us will be forced to leave this country. Be careful. These young people decided to trust the President of the United States, to trust the Government of the United States, and to run the risk of disclosing everything--giving the most sensitive, personal information about themselves and about their families. They trusted us, and they trusted this country to treat them fairly and justly. So 780,000 have come forward. They submitted their filing fees. They paid for the expenses of the government. They did it knowing that even with this new status--this DACA status under President Obama's Executive order--they didn't qualify for one penny of Federal Government benefits, and by working, they would be forced to pay taxes, which they were glad to do. Again, 780,000 came forward. Then came the last election--the election of a President of the United States who had made immigration the centerpiece of his election message and who had really sewn doubt, and even fear, about allowing immigrants into our Nation of immigrants. It is not a new message in America. It is hardly a new message around the world. Being suspicious and fearful, even hateful, of immigrants has been a part of human experience from the beginning of time. So what would happen to these DACA-protected 780,000 young people? President Trump announced, through his Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, on September 5 of this year, that DACA protection was ending. As of March 5 of next year, 2018, no one could sign up for DACA protection, and as the protection expired for each of them, there was no renewal for 780,000 young people. The President then challenged Congress and said: Do something. If I believe, he said, that DACA is wrong, pass a law; take care of the problem. He said that on September 5. Here we are in December, just days away from the end of the year, and we have done nothing--nothing. And what has happened? Across America, these young people, their families, and the people who believe in them have begged us to step up and do something. They have said: In the name of justice, in the name of fairness, in the name of morality, do something. And we have done nothing--nothing. Many of them have decided in desperation to bring their message here to the Capitol. Right now, as I stand and speak on the floor of the Senate, there are thousands outside on the Mall, roaming through the corridors, trying to stop people who they believe might be Congressmen or Senators, to beg for the passage of the Dream Act, to beg for the reinstatement of the DACA protection. Some of them have made great sacrifices. I have gone out to talk to a lot of them. They have never been to Washington before. They have never been inside this Capitol Building. They don't know what it means to lobby. They can't afford a lawyer or a lobbyist. They are coming here to beg for their lives and to beg for their families. Some people are shunning them, refusing to talk to them. Others are gracious and warm and welcoming. They get on people's nerves because there are a lot of them and they want to talk to people about solving the problem. Some of them have sat in our offices--even my office--and I understand it. As awkward as it may be, as uncomfortable as it may be, I welcome them. I want them to know what America is about--a place where people in this country have the right to speak, to assemble, to petition their government. They believe this is their government. They look at that flag and they say: That is my flag too. Legally, they are wrong. They are undocumented. Many have no country at all to which they can turn. Who are they? Who are these 780,000 young people? I can tell you who 900 of them are. Nine hundred of these undocumented young people stood up and took an oath to a country that will not legally recognize them to serve in our military and risk their lives for each and every one of us. What greater proof can we ask about their commitment to this country? Nine hundred of them did this. If we fail to provide DACA or Dream Act protection to them, these 900 will be forced to leave the military of the United States of America. They will be turned away, despite the fact that they have volunteered their lives for this country. Twenty thousand of them teach in our classrooms around America. I have met many of them. They are teaching in inner city schools through a program called Teach For America, which sends them to some of the poorest school districts in America. They are spending their lives, as undocumented in America, trying to help the least of those of the population, those in desperate need of their assistance. Among them are thousands who are going to school now and college. Let me tell you that their challenge in college is a heck of a lot harder than the challenge for most young people. They don't qualify for any Federal assistance to go to college--no Pell grants, no Federal loans. They have to go to work. They have to work and earn the money to pay for tuition. That is what their lives are all about. So for those who would dismiss these as lazy people who really can't offer much to the future of America, take a minute to get to know them. Yesterday, one of my Republican colleagues looked me in the eye and said: We are talking about amnesty; these are people who violated the law. You are talking about forgiving them for violating the law. Some of them, by his definition, violated the law when they were carried in their mothers' arms to the United States at the age of 2. Does that sound right? Does that sound just? Does it sound fair to say that these are people who have broken the law in America? I don't think so. Let me say a word about their parents. There are some people who say: OK, I don't hate the Dreamers, but I get to hate their parents, right? They did break the law. Technically, they probably did. I will not argue the point, but I will tell you something. As a father, I would risk breaking the law for the life, future, and safety of my children. I would, and most people would, and they did. It wasn't for any selfish motive. It was so that their kids had a chance. That is what it was all about, and that is why they came to this country. They knew that at any minute it could fall apart and they would be asked to leave, or worse. They risked it for their children. So I am not going to stand in moral judgment of these parents of Dreamers. As to legal judgment, the case is clear. But as to a moral judgment, no, I just will not do it. What I have done 101 or 102 times is to come to this floor and just tell a story--a story about a Dreamer--so that people know who they are. Today I would like to tell you the story of this young lady whose name is Karen Reyes. Karen Reyes is the 104th Dreamer whom I have introduced on the floor of the Senate, brought to the United States from Mexico. She grew up in San Antonio. She had a childhood like other American kids--Girl Scouts, summer camps, church groups, volleyball. Karen didn't even know she was undocumented until she was in junior high school. She was a good student. She graduated with honors from high school. She was a member of the marching band. Here is what she said about growing up in America: I might be an undocumented American, but I am an American. I came to this country when I was 2 years old. The only recollection that I have of Mexico is when I visited as a young child. I have not gone back in 20 years. I grew up here. I formed a life here. I made friends here. I received my education here. After high school, Karen went to San Antonio College and then transferred to the University of Texas San Antonio. She made the President's Honors List and the Dean's List. She found time to volunteer at the University Health System and at the San Antonio Youth Literacy project. She tutored second grade students in reading, and she worked with communities and schools where she mentored and tutored elementary students. In 2012, Karen graduated with a bachelor of arts in interdisciplinary studies. She went on to the Deaf Education and Hearing Science Program at the University of Texas Health Science Center in San Antonio. In 2014, Karen graduated with a master's degree in deaf education and hearing science. Today, she is working as a special education teacher in Austin, TX. Here is a picture of her with the kids. She teaches 3- and 4-year-old kids who are deaf or hard of hearing. She teaches kids with disabilities. Here is what she said about DACA, the program that was abolished by President Trump, which allows her to live in the United States and to work as a teacher: DACA made me visible. DACA made it possible for me to teach children who are deaf and hard of hearing. I am helping these students and families on their journey to being able to communicate and achieve their dreams. Before I didn't think I had a voice, but now I do. . . . I get to change lives every single day. Twenty thousand other DACA students and recipients like Karen are teachers in our schools. Because DACA was repealed, Texas stands to lose 2,000 teachers. I ask the State of Texas: Are you ready to lose Karen? Are you ready to lose 2,000 more just like her because the Senate and the House of Representatives refused to act, refused to legislate, refused to provide protection to her? As for Karen, her DACA expires in August of next year. This will be her last school year. If Congress doesn't step up and meet its responsibility and pass the Dream Act, her time teaching these deaf and hard of hearing children will come to an end. In a few days we are going to go home and celebrate Christmas with our families. It is a big, important time of year. My wife and I are looking forward to it. We get to see all of the grandkids in one place. It is going to be pure bedlam, but we are going to love every second of it. Christmas means that much to our families. Being together means so much to our families. Think for a moment about those who are protected with DACA. This may be their last Christmas in the United States. They don't know where they will be next Christmas because the President abolished the protection program and because Congress refuses to act. They don't know where they will be and they don't know whether they will be with family or not. That is the reality. What a reflection on our Nation that we have reached this point to punish someone like Karen, a giving, caring, educated professional person who is spending time helping little boys and girls who desperately need her help. Some in this Chamber--and I have seen them face to face--are ready to tell her to leave: We don't need you anymore, Karen. Go back to wherever you came from. Just get out of here. That is their attitude. It is not mine nor the majority of Americans. Over three out of four Americans believe Karen deserves a chance. Over three out of four Americans believe she should be allowed to stay and earn her way to legal status and citizenship. Incidentally, 60 percent of those who voted for Donald Trump happen to believe that same thing. But there are voices of division and fear and hatred in this administration. I have seen them. I have heard them. I know what they have to say. The question is, will they prevail? Will they define this President in terms of his treatment of people who are just asking for a chance to be part of America's future? The answer to that question is really not in the President's hands. It is in our hands. We owe it to these young people to do the right thing. I yield the floor.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, Cesar Chavez, the great champion of justice and human dignity, once offered this advice about friendship: He said; ``If you really want to make a friend, go to someone's house and eat with him. . . . The people who give you their food give you their heart.'' The Senate Dining Room isn't Steve Johnson's house, but for the 22 years that he has worked there, Steve has poured his heart into his job, and he has become a friend--or at least a friendly face--to Senators, our families, staff members, and visitors. As general manager of the Senate Dining Rooms and two other eateries in the Capitol, Steve works hard to create places where people who might not normally talk to each other can sit down at adjoining tables, eat a meal, and maybe swap stories or jokes. In the Senate Dining Room, with its white linen table cloths and crystal chandeliers, you might see Republican and Democratic Senators and staff members asking after each other's families. In the refectory on the first floor, reporters and visitors to the Capitol stand in line together to grab a quick bite. Downstairs, in the carryout, you can find the whole Capitol family, as Steve calls them; ``the white collars, the blue collars, the green collars, and the Capitol Police,'' all eating together. It is a little like stepping back into a better, less partisan time. On Friday, December 22, Steve Johnson is leaving the Senate. He is retiring. Before he does, I want to take a moment to thank Steve for his many years of good and loyal service to the Senate. Until 1995, when Steve began working as a maitre d' in the Senate Dining Room, he had never seen the inside of the U.S. Capitol, but he had seen the outside of this magnificent building many times. You see, Steve grew up in Freehold, NJ, home of ``The Boss,'' Bruce Springsteen. He was one of six kids. His mom trained as a nurse, and his dad was a director of a YMCA. In 1963, Steve's Dad, Herbert, attended the March on Washington, where Martin Luther King gave his ``I Have a Dream'' speech. The experience made a profound impression. During Steve's childhood and teen years, whenever there was a big march or rally in Washington, the whole Johnson family--mom, dad, and six kids--would pile into the family station wagon, drive to Washington, DC, for the day, and drive back to Freehold that night. During those childhood trips, Steve developed a reverence for this building. After 22 years of working here, he still has it. He is still awed when he sees the Capitol dome gleaming in the sun as he arrives at work, or sees the Capitol Christmas tree lit up at night. It is a feeling that many of us share. Steve started his career in food service nearly 40 years ago, shortly after he graduated from Glassboro State College in New Jersey with a bachelor's degree in business administration. He went to work at a restaurant in his hometown. A few years later, he and a business partner took over running a more than 200-year-old inn, the Liberty Tavern, in New Jersey's capitol city of Trenton. They gave it their best try, with clever marketing and a hard-working staff, but couldn't make good of it. Fortunately for us, Steve's wife, Joanne, took a job with the Federal Government in Washington, and Steve made the move with her. Before the Senate, he worked at the Mayflower Hotel, another Washington legend. As I mentioned, he started in the Senate Dining Room as maitre d' and worked his way up to assistant general manager and finally general manager. He works incredibly hard, from early in the morning until evening or later. With his calm demeanor, he makes a tough job look almost easy. That calm may have something to do with the fact that Steve is a dedicated marathon runner. He has run 18 marathons, including seven Boston Marathons. He is a modest man in a sea of big egos, a scrupulously nonpartisan man in era of sharp partisan lines. He and his dedicated staff are important members of the Senate family. There is a line in a Bruce Springsteen song where Bruce says, ``I'm ready to grow young again.'' Sadly, none of us can actually do that. But Steve has decided that he is ready to be a rookie again and try something completely new and different. In this next chapter of his life, he will work as a volunteer literacy tutor for adults who speak English as a Second Language. It is another way, I think, of making people feel at home and cared for, something that Steve Johnson is so good at. In closing, I want to thank Steve again for his many years of service to the Senate, and I want to wish Steve and Joanne the very best of luck as they start this new chapter in their lives.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, yesterday I went to Benito Juarez high school in Chicago, in the southwest part of the city, in the Pilsen neighborhood. It has a predominantly Mexican-American enrollment at this high school. It is one of my favorites. I have been there time and again for so many different events. It is full of life and full of some amazing young students and some great teachers and a great principal, Mr. Ocon. I was there 2 weeks ago for a mariachi band ensemble, training students across the city to be musicians in the Mexican tradition. There is so much life there. But yesterday was not the happiest occasion. It was sad and worrisome. I met with about 20 of the students there, all of whom have been protected by DACA. DACA was President Obama's Executive order that was issued in 2012. That Executive order said that if you were brought to the United States as a child, an infant, a toddler, a young person, and grew up in this country undocumented; if you had no problems of any serious nature with the law; if you finished your education; if you went through a criminal background check and paid a fee, you would be protected and be able to stay in America 2 years at a time to go to school, to work, whatever your aspirations may be. Under President Obama's Executive order, 780,000 young people came forward, and the 20 I met at Benito Juarez were among them. They got the protection they needed to legally get a job. For a lot of these young students, that is a critical part of their lives because, being undocumented, they don't qualify for any Federal assistance to go to college. If they want to go to college, they have to save up for it, and they have to find the money and work for the tuition and other expenses. So getting a job is a very important part of it. These young people, as they went through the DACA process, knew that they were safe from being deported. That is a fear which many of us can't even understand, but it is a real fear for many people in this country who are here undocumented. So for these young people, they have that chance. On September 5, President Trump announced he was ending the DACA protection program as of March 5 of next year, putting an end to the protection these young people have. As their DACA expires, they will be vulnerable to deportation. They will reach the point where they can no longer work in America. The end of DACA as we know it will dramatically change the lives of thousands of young people. It will change the lives of 900 of these DACA-protected young people who volunteered to serve in our military-- currently serving in our military, willing to risk their lives for a country that will not give them legal status. Imagine that for a moment. If they had to prove that they really cared about America, what more could they do then to put their lives on the line? They have done it, 900 of them. When DACA goes away on March 5 of next year, they have to leave the military service. That is the end of their opportunity to serve America. Many of them are in the military because they bring special skills and special capacities to lead. We will lose them. It will mean that 20,000 of these DACA-protected young people, when it goes away for them, will no longer be able to teach--20,000 teachers across America. I met one of them yesterday, Katherine Galeano. Katherine, whom I had met before, is a special-ed teacher. Her family originally came from Nicaragua. She told a heartbreaking story about what happened 10 years ago. She was in high school. She was taking a shower in the morning before she was to go to school. There was a knock on the bathroom door. Her mother was crying and screaming: ``Come out. Come out.'' Katherine came out to see her father being handcuffed. They were deporting him to Nicaragua. He was gone. That was the last time he saw her and she saw him--10 years ago. As she told the story, she said that her mother tried to make it as a single mom with her kids here in the United States and finally gave up and went back to Nicaragua, leaving Katherine to raise herself, to pay her own way through college, to get a teaching certificate and teach special-ed in the city of Chicago. As of March 5 next year, Katherine is finished teaching. It is over. DACA is gone. When I met with these students yesterday, you can imagine what they were worried about. They are worried about themselves and their future. They are worried about their families. They are worried about having turned over all this information to the government when they signed up for DACA which can now be used against them and their families. That is what they are worried about. Many of them, I am sure, reflect on the fact that this could be their last Christmas in the United States of America. If that seems overly dramatic, then you need to meet them and talk to them and understand the reality of their lives. That is what they face. While President Trump did prospectively eliminate the DACA Program, he issued a challenge to us. He said to Congress: Now do something. If I am going to eliminate this Executive order, what is Congress going to do in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives? Will you pass a law to deal with this challenge? He said that in September, and here we are in the middle of December having done nothing--nothing--and the clock is ticking. It is a clock that means an awful lot to thousands of young people across America, including those at Benito Juarez high school in the city of Chicago. There are people who want to get this fixed, Republicans and Democrats. We need to come together and get this done. There is no excuse for delay. We know what needs to be done. We need to give these young people a chance. I introduced the DREAM Act 16 years ago here in the Senate, and the DREAM Act said to these young people: We are going to put you on a path to legalization and a path to citizenship. It won't be easy, and it won't be quick, and you will have to show us that you can be a productive part of America's future, but then we will give you your chance. These young people grew up in the United States of America, pledging allegiance to that flag, singing our national anthem, believing in their heart of hearts that this was home, but it really wasn't, legally. They were undocumented and illegal in America. Now the question is, What will we do to make that better, to fix it, to come up with a just solution? Some of my Republican colleagues say: Well, you have to give us more than just fixing their problem; you have to give us some fix to our immigration system. I am not against that. I was part of a group of eight Senators who spent months together--four Democrats, four Republicans. We crafted a comprehensive immigration bill, which I am proud of. It passed on the floor of the Senate and was sent over to the Republican House of Representatives where they refused to even consider it. They would not bring it up for a vote. It died in the Republican House. I know this immigration system in America is broken. I have talked about one specific piece of it this morning, but there are many aspects of it that are broken. The Republicans have said to us: Do something to make our borders stronger. Sign me up. I voted for that on the comprehensive immigration bill. Does that mean more technology, more equipment, making certain that it is clear that our border is going to be a real border that you cannot cross at will? Of course. I am prepared to do that, and many Democrats--maybe all the Democrats--would join in that effort. There are things that we can do to fix this system, but what we cannot do is ignore it. We cannot ignore what is happening to these young people, the threat to their future, to their families, and we can't ignore the reality that this is a basic test of who we are as Americans. I stand here today as the son of an immigrant mother. My mom was brought to this country when she was 2 years old, and thank goodness my grandmother decided to put her on a boat, bring her from Lithuania to the United States. I wouldn't be here otherwise. That is my story, that is my family's story, and that is America's story. That is who we are. I cannot imagine my grandmother and grandfather, whom I never knew, making the decision to come to a country where they didn't even speak the language, giving up everything and leaving it behind in their mother country of Lithuania to try a new country called the United States of America. That story has been repeated millions of times, and thank goodness it has. They not only brought strong backs and strong minds, but they brought with them a part of their DNA, which was a DNA of culture, courage, and determination, and I think that is part of who we are as Americans--and proud to be. Let me tell you the story of one of these Dreamers, as I call them, or DACA young people. All of my speeches notwithstanding, these stories tell more about this situation than anything I could possibly say. This is Maria Rocha. I have told stories of Dreamers on the floor; she is 101, I believe, of the list that I have given. She came to the United States at the age of 3, brought from Mexico. Maria grew up in a rural town called Stonewall, TX. Her fondest memories of growing up in the Texas Hill Country include haystack jumping, armadillo chasing, and fishing in a lake. Later in her childhood, Maria's family moved to San Antonio. Maria was a very good student. She graduated from high school twelfth in her class. She played varsity soccer. She was recognized as a San Antonio Scholar Athlete of the Week during her junior year. At the same time, as she was going to school and playing soccer, she was working a job to help support herself and her family. Maria was accepted at the University of Texas at San Antonio. While enrolled as a full-time student, she kept right on working. In fact, she juggled three different jobs. She was a housekeeper, a babysitter, and a personal assistant. She had to come up with $40,000 out of pocket to pay for college education. She didn't qualify for any Federal assistance because of her immigration status. So these young students in college are working harder than many others just to make sure they succeed. In May of 2012, she graduated with a degree in interdisciplinary studies. After graduation, she decided to enter a program known as Teach For America. Almost everyone knows about this program, but they should know that this is a program in which college graduates volunteer to teach in some of the most challenging schools across America. Maria was one of those. Today, Maria continues her career as a teacher. She teaches third grade in her hometown of San Antonio, TX. At the same time, she is pursuing a graduate degree in education, once again with no Federal assistance, no Federal loans. Without DACA, Maria would not be able to work and could be deported immediately. When asked what would happen to her without DACA protection, which President Trump eliminated as of March 5 next year, Maria only thinks of her students. Here is what she said: How are my students going to take it? What is going to happen to them? That is what scares me. Nationwide, there are 20,000 DACA recipients just like her. With Teach For America alone, 190 of these undocumented students who have gone on to get degrees in college are teaching in the Teach For America Program. Currently, they are teaching 10,000 students across 11 States, with one-third of them in the State of Texas. In a few weeks, Congress is going to face the reality of this DACA provision by President Trump coming into full effect. As of that day, she and others like her will start the clock ticking to lose their jobs, be legally unemployable in America. Christmas is a special time of year for every family of Christian faith and those who observe it. It is a special time of year for my family. The real question though is, Can we leave this week, ignoring this issue? Can we go home and enjoy our Christmas without thinking for a moment of how young people like Maria may be facing their last Christmas in the United States of America? That is the reality of what she faces. So why don't we face this issue? This is an empty Senate Chamber, which is usually the case, unfortunately. I wish it were filled--filled with a healthy, fulsome debate on this issue. Let's have our disagreements, bring them out. Let's work out our compromises. Let's do something that is really radical around here. Let's come together and legislate--Democrats and Republicans. Let's solve this problem. That is why we were elected, not to collect a paycheck and build a pension but to solve the problems facing America. This one is real, it is timely, and it is now. Maria Rocha and 780,000 other young people are counting on us to do something. Let's not come up with excuses. Let's come up with answers. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, C-SPAN is an interesting phenomenon. When I go back home to Illinois, I run into people who say: I saw you on C- SPAN. I often joke and say: Do you have trouble sleeping? Why are you watching C-SPAN? I wonder who it is that really watches C-SPAN. It could be a lot of people who are really fascinated by politics. It could be folks who are finding it difficult to sleep. It could be some older folks who just pass the time by watching what happens on the floor of the Senate and the House. Tonight, I think we have a special audience of C-SPAN. Tonight, I think it is entirely possible that we are going to have the wealthiest section of audience and television viewers in the history of C-SPAN. Do you know why? They have a bill coming up--a bill that is designed for the wealthiest people in America. So they are probably at this point trying to figure out how to live-stream C-SPAN onto their yachts so they can see if this tax bill is going to pass. Why would they do that? Why would they be tuned in? Because this is the biggest tax break for the wealthiest people in the history of Tax Code reform. It is. It turns out that in 2027, 83 percent of the tax breaks in this bill go to the top 1 percent of wage earners in America. Boy, how can you sit down and write a tax bill that is so lopsided for the wealthiest people in America? You had to have said to the staff first: Find out what taxes are left that the wealthy might pay and get rid of them-- reduce them right and left. And they did. Imagine that that is your starting point for Tax Code reform in America--that you are ignoring working families and the reality of the life they lead, you are ignoring small and medium-sized businesses, and you are focusing on the wealthiest people in America and the biggest corporations. Do you know what I found in Illinois? When you travel around my State and meet the business leaders and ask them point-blank: Tell me about Federal taxes, the biggest corporations never complain because the Tax Code is loaded with escape hatches for the biggest and wealthiest corporations and individuals. It is small and medium-sized businesses that pay the most taxes. They are the ones that should have been the biggest beneficiaries on the bill. Secondly, there are the working families. People who are struggling paycheck to paycheck, who can't save money for their kids' future, are worried about their kids' student loans. Wouldn't it have been great if the Tax Code reform really focused on them instead of on the wealthiest people in America? It is a stereotype, I know, that the Republicans worry about the rich instead of the working folks, but when you look at this bill, sadly, that is the reality. Here is the good news, if there is any good news in that terrible story I just recounted. The American people get it. They understand it. How in the world could you write a bill and call it tax reform and tax cuts, and have two-thirds of America hate it instantly? They did it. Congratulations. You put together a bill, which, instinctively, the American people knew was a bad deal for them. And it is. When you take a look at this bill, you realize why we are asked to vote on this Republican tax plan--a plan written behind closed doors and rushed through Congress on a last-minute rush this year. It is because the Republicans are bound and determined to have something that they passed this year. In all fairness, they passed the Defense authorization bill, but they spent month after month on repeal and failure to replace our healthcare system, and now, before they leave town at the end of this calendar year, they are bound and determined to get this done, whatever it takes, their so-called tax reform plan. After a year in control of Congress and the White House and extraordinarily few legislative achievements to show for it, Republicans are forcing through this partisan tax plan only a few short weeks after it was unveiled. You may not remember unless you were watching C-SPAN that night--I came to the floor when we were finally given the Senate tax bill. It was about 500 pages long. As I was going through it, on page 257--I remember the page--I looked at it, and I thought, what is this? There was a page in the middle of the tax bill with all sorts of scribbled handwriting that was absolutely impossible to read. Now, remember, this is a Tax Code that is going to have an impact on individuals, families, and businesses to the tune of millions of dollars, and here was a page in it that no one could read. Do you know why I know no one could read it? I submitted it to the Record, and the clerk of the Senate came and found me afterward and said: Senator, you can't put this in the Congressional Record because we can't read it. That is what was going on here in writing the Tax Code of the United States of America. It was a slapdash, hurried effort that sadly does not reflect the best of this institution or the best of the Members who are part of it. Why would they do this? Because if this bill were subject to proper scrutiny, as it should have been--you only really reform the Tax Code once every several decades--a monumental giveaway to corporate America would have emerged, a tax break or giveaways to the wealthiest Americans. So while most families are focused on getting ready for the holidays, my Republican colleagues and friends are hoping most Americans will be too busy to notice them passing a tax bill that will raise taxes on middle-income families. This is supposed to be the greatest deliberative body in the world, the U.S. Senate, and my Republican colleagues threw regular order and bipartisan input right out the window of the Capitol. They have spent the past 2 weeks behind closed doors writing the final version of this tax bill. Only last Friday evening--last Friday--we finally saw the text of this tax plan fully released, fully revealed. There are more than 1,000 pages of new Tax Code, and that is what we are expected to understand and to vote on in a matter of days. Are the memories of my Republican colleagues so short that they have forgotten their repeated calls of ``read the bill'' when we considered the Affordable Care Act? Did they forget their criticism of that process, which took place, incidentally, over many months, characterized by transparency, multiple bipartisan hearings, and included well over 100 Republican amendments? Have they forgotten all the criticism they leveled on that effort to try to provide health insurance for more Americans? This is no way for major legislation to be written, this tax bill before us. It certainly reflects the best wishes and hardest work of many of the lobbyists and corporate donors who benefit my Republican colleagues. Is it any wonder that after this rushed process, the initial analysis of the final bill shows that millions of working families in Illinois and across the Nation will be hurt, while the wealthiest 1 percent of wage earners in America receive a massive windfall? Sadly, it is no surprise. In their plan, Republicans chose to make essentially all individual provisions to the tax bill temporary in order to pay for massive, permanent corporate cuts that will overwhelmingly benefit the wealthiest investors. The result? As I said, when the bill is fully phased in by 2027, more than half of all Americans will see their taxes increase under the Republican plan. These are tax increases that will be felt particularly hard by those households in the bottom 60 percent and those families with kids. By 2027, while middle-income families pay a higher tab, the richest 1 percent of Americans will receive a whopping 83 percent of all the tax cuts under this plan. I just can't believe they pulled this off, that the Republicans figured out how to give 83 percent of the tax breaks to the top 1 percent of wage earners in America and sell it as tax reform to help working families. It is indefensible. This devastating result was baked into the DNA of this Republican plan from the start. There is no greater example of this than Republicans' determination to erode State and local tax deductions. It used to be a standard principle in American taxation that you wouldn't tax people on the money they paid in other taxes. We didn't tax a tax until this bill came along. We used to say that if you pay a State income tax or State sales tax or State property tax, we are not going to impose a Federal tax on your tax payment--no tax on the tax. They didn't buy it. They changed it. They put limits on the amount of deductions that you could take for this. What does it mean? Ask the Realtors in my State, the homebuilders, and they will tell you that this is going to be a damper on economic growth in the State of Illinois--a growth that we desperately need in my State to create jobs and opportunities. This deduction is taken by nearly one-third of all taxpayers, and taxpayers in my home State benefit from it among the most in the Nation. The principle is simple: Under the new Republican plan, Illinoisans will start paying Federal taxes on the local, State, and property taxes that they pay, and they don't receive the deduction that historically has been there. Republicans apparently feel differently because in the face of weeks of warnings from Realtors, homebuilders, local school districts, State and local officials, and first responders about the increased difficulty that the elimination of this deduction will create, it didn't deter them one bit, and every single Illinois Republican Congressman ignored all of this and voted for this terrible plan. It means higher tax bills for middle-income families in my State and many others and a strain on crucial State and local investments in education, infrastructure, and public safety. That isn't the only hit to middle-income families. Here is the one that I find the most reprehensible. Millions of people will lose health insurance because of this tax reform bill. It guts one of the major provisions of the Affordable Care Act. After failing miserably to achieve one of their campaign promises to repeal the Affordable Care Act and take away healthcare from millions of families, Republicans slipped into this tax bill a provision that undermines the Affordable Care Act. The net result of it is an increase of 10 to 20 percent for health insurance premiums for those buying in the marketplace, and--this is a kicker--13 million Americans are going to lose health insurance because of this health reform bill that is brought to us by the Republicans. I don't see how you can go home to any State and say: Good news. I gave a tax break to the wealthiest people in America and the biggest corporations, and average working folks here are going to lose their health insurance. How can you stand up and say that is good for your State or for this country? Republicans' efforts to take away healthcare from families and give tax cuts to the wealthy shouldn't surprise us. The surprise here is that so many of the so-called fiscal hawks--how many times have I heard my Republican colleagues come to the floor and pose for holy pictures when it comes to the national debt. Oh, it goes over and over again, the speeches they give when there is a Democratic President. Now that there is a Republican President, political amnesia has set in. It turns out that this Republican tax reform--giving tax breaks to the wealthy and not to the middle-income families of America--will add $1.5 trillion to our national debt. Who will pay off that debt for these tax breaks to the wealthy? I am afraid it is our kids and our grandkids. Somehow these fiscal hawks are able to convince themselves that cutting taxes on the wealthy is worth a new burden on our kids. When you get past all the fancy rhetoric, the bottom line is, Republicans believe that we can afford to add $1.5 trillion to the debt if it means giving tax cuts to the wealthy but that we can't afford it as a nation when we know we are going to need it to make massive investments in things that mean a lot to working families. Shouldn't we have put more money into fighting the opioid crisis that claimed almost 2,000 lives last year in my home State of Illinois? Shouldn't we have put more money into helping kids go to college so they aren't burdened with student loans that change their lives? Shouldn't we have put more money into medical research? Couldn't we have put more money into investing in our infrastructure? No. The Republicans say there is a much higher priority--tax cuts for wealthy people. What does make sense to my constituents and millions more across America is that $1.5 trillion increase in national debt poses a real threat to our economic future and a threat to the future of Medicare and Medicaid. Paul Ryan, Speaker of the House, Republican leader, said they are going to take care of the added deficit and debt by cutting entitlement programs like Medicare and Medicaid. I would say to Paul Ryan, my neighbor from Wisconsin, you are in for a fight, my friend--and it will not be just the Democrats; it will be a lot of folks in Wisconsin who aren't going to stand for that outcome. Americans deserve better than what the Republican leaders in Congress have brought to us in this bill--rushed through without bipartisan consideration and without review by experts. This may be a ``big political win for the Republican Party and their donors,'' but it is on the backs of hard-working families. Some of these consequences that we face are already dangerously clear, others, which we will only discover as we pore through the fine print of this 1,000-page bill--we can only guess what they will mean. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Wisconsin (Ms. Baldwin) and the Senator from Illinois (Ms. Duckworth) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Wisconsin (Ms. Baldwin) and the Senator from Illinois (Ms. Duckworth) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Manchin) and the Senator from Washington (Mrs. Murray) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, this week, Senate Republicans sought to confirm the 10th, 11th, and 12th circuit court nominees of the year. The Republican-controlled Senate has been moving at warp speed to try to confirm President Trump's circuit court nominees as quickly as possible. Twelve circuit court nominees is the same number of nominees confirmed in the first years of Presidents Obama, Bush, and Clinton combined. In quickly rushing through President Trump's picks for these critical lifetime appointments, my Republican colleagues have been abandoning longstanding norms of due diligence and careful scrutiny. They want to rubberstamp these nominees despite a lack of complete information about the nominees' records and despite clear warning signs about the nominees' ideologies, temperaments and judgment. Consider the nominees that came before us this week. Eighth Circuit nominee Steven Grasz received a rare unanimous ``not qualified'' rating from the American Bar Association. Only 4 out of 1,755 nominees reviewed by the ABA since 1989 have received this rating. For those who are not aware, the ABA has worked since the Eisenhower administration to conduct a confidential peer review process for vetting judicial candidates. For their review of Mr. Grasz, the ABA conducted 207 interviews with his peers. These interviews revealed some very troubling things. People familiar with Mr. Grasz raised serious concerns about his objectivity, his gratuitously rude conduct, and his deeply held partisan loyalty. Those are major red flags for a lifetime appointment to the Federal bench. After the ABA's review committee voted Mr. Grasz unanimously ``not qualified'' for the bench, rather than reconsidering their support for the nominee, a number of my Republican colleagues decided to aggressively attack the ABA. One Senator described the ABA as ``blatant partisans with a sad track record of hackery.'' These criticisms are over the top. The ABA peer review and vetting process provides the Senate with valuable information to consider when we decide how to vote on nominees. President Obama took ABA ratings seriously enough that he did not nominate anyone who received a ``not qualified'' rating. Of course, Senators do not have to vote on nominees solely based upon ABA ratings. For example, I voted in committee for Kansas District Court nominee Holly Teeter despite the ``not qualified'' rating that she was given by the ABA. I have voted against nominees who received ``well qualified'' ratings, such as Neil Gorsuch, because I had serious questions about their judgment and their objectivity. It would be foolish for Senators to ignore the ABA's peer review process altogether. In Mr. Grasz's case, his ABA rating is just one of many troubling signs. Just look at some of the controversial things Mr. Grasz has said and written. He wrote in a law review article that courts can ignore jurisprudence that they consider to be ``questionable.'' He wrote that the legacy of Roe v. Wade was ``moral bankruptcy.'' He described the possibility of Nebraska recognizing same-sex marriages as a ``grave danger.'' He falsely claimed that the term ``sexual orientation'' could include bigamy and pedophilia. He tried to amend the Omaha city charter because he was upset about a 2012 city ordinance protecting LGBT employees from workplace discrimination. In Mr. Grasz's case, I share the ABA's unanimous view that he lacks the proper temperament and judgment to sit on the circuit court, and I am deeply concerned about his extreme views. That is why I opposed his nomination. I also could not support the nomination of James Ho for the Fifth Circuit, for several reasons. First, I am very troubled by Mr. Ho's responses when I asked him whether waterboarding is torture and illegal under U.S. law. He said, ``It has always been my understanding that Congress enacted legislation for the purpose of expressing its serious opposition to waterboarding as illegal under U.S. law.'' That is not an answer about what the law says; that is an evasion. Mr. Ho should have said, with no equivocation and no uncertainty, that waterboarding is illegal, that it is cruel, inhuman, and degrading and that it is torture. That is the law under the 2006 McCain Torture Amendment. This is a critical issue for me. I am deeply troubled that we are, once again, seeing nominees come before the Senate, like Mr. Ho and Greg Katsas, who are tap dancing around this issue. We need to take a clear stand when it comes to waterboarding. This is not some abstract hypothetical for Mr. Ho. He wrote a 2002 Office of Legal Counsel memo for John Yoo that was cited in the infamous Bybee torture memo. It is critical that the Senate get access to Mr. Ho's memo. The Bybee torture memo was a dark chapter in our Nation's history, and Mr. Ho's work was cited in it more than once. I cannot in good conscience vote for Mr. Ho's nomination without seeing what he wrote. In 2014, when former OLC attorney David Barron was nominated by President Obama to the First Circuit, Chairman Grassley insisted on seeing his OLC memos. Chairman Grassley wrote of Mr. Barron: ``The Senate simply cannot evaluate whether this nominee is fit for lifetime appointment to one of the nation's most important courts without complete access to his writings.'' The chairman's standard should apply to Mr. Ho's nomination as well. I also have serious concerns with personal views that Mr. Ho has publicly expressed--in particular, his writings in opposition to campaign finance laws and the op-ed Mr. Ho wrote in praise of Jeff Mateer, who has described transgender children as part of ``Satan's plan.'' I could not support Mr. Ho's nomination. I also was compelled to oppose the nomination of Don Willett to the Fifth Circuit. Justice Willett provided us with one of the more troubling nomination hearings we have had in recent years. The key moment was when Senator Feinstein asked him if he stood by beliefs he expressed in a 1998 memo. In this memo, Willett explained his opposition to the issuance of a gubernatorial proclamation declaring ``Business Women's Week'' in Texas. Willett's memo said: I resist the proclamation's talk of `glass ceilings,' pay equity (an allegation that some studies debunk), the need to place kids in the care of rented strangers, sexual discrimination/harassment, and the need generally for better `working conditions' for women (read: more government.) . . . I strongly resist anything that shows we believe the hype. When Senator Feinstein asked Justice Willett if he still held these beliefs, he was silent for 10 and a half painful seconds before he asked Senator Feinstein to repeat the question. She did, and I repeated the question too; yet Justice Willett never gave the committee a straight answer. He should have, if he wanted to earn my vote. Justice Willett is a prolific tweeter, and he has sent tweets that appear to mock same-sex marriage and transgender students. This raises questions about his judicial temperament. Justice Willett also has expressed troubling views about what he calls ``judicial passivism.'' He said it is ``corrosive'' when judges ``are not active in preserving the limits our Framers actually enshrined.'' Justice Willett seems to think that courts should be activist in limiting laws that he sees as burdening economic freedoms, such as regulations that protect the health and safety of working people. In short, Justice Willett has not convinced me that he is in the mainstream when it comes to temperament and judgment, and I could not support his nomination. Before I was a Senator, I was a lawyer in downstate Illinois, and I looked up to Federal judges. I thought that, to get that job, you had to be a cut above. Otherwise, you wouldn't make it through the Senate's rigorous advice and consent process, but sadly, this Republican Senate is turning advice and consent into a rubberstamp assembly line when it comes to Trump nominees. Republicans want to pack the courts with judges who will support President Trump's agenda, and so they are hurrying to confirm as many of his picks as possible, even if they are not qualified or if we don't have all the information we need to evaluate them or if the nominees won't give us straight answers at their hearings. Our Federal judiciary is being diminished as a result. I wish my Republican colleagues would stand up for an independent judiciary and a meaningful advice and consent process. We should not be rushing to hand lifetime appointments to problematic nominees. Instead, we should take our due diligence and vetting obligations seriously and only put people on the bench whose qualifications, integrity, independence, and judgment are indisputable. Because that was not the case with this week's nominees, I could not support them.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Washington (Mrs. Murray) is necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Washington (Mrs. Murray) is necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, on September 5 of this year, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced the repeal of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program, known as DACA. That same day, President Trump called on Congress to come up with a solution to legalize DACA. He challenged us; he said to the Senate, and he said to the House: I am going to eliminate this Executive order of President Obama. Now it is your turn. Pass a law if you want to protect 780,000 young people who had signed up under DACA. DACA was the direct result of the DREAM Act, which I introduced 16 years ago, to try to protect young people who came to the United States, brought here by their parents at an early age, who grew up here and don't have a future. They don't have a home. They don't have a legal status. They don't have a country to call their own. It strikes me that these young people themselves did nothing wrong. I can even argue that their parents did what every parent would do--the best thing they could for their kids. But in this situation, trying to focus on what their future will be, their future is clearly in doubt, and right now many of them are worried about what is going to happen next. You see, without the protection of DACA, they can be deported. They are undocumented. They can't legally work in the United States, and many of them have wondered whether they should continue school or what they will do when they can't go to work. These are real-life challenges, and many times they break down emotionally as they talk about the uncertainty of their future. Just outside this Capitol is a beautiful Mall, and smack dab in the middle of it are two white tents. They are tents that have been built by these young Dreamers in an effort to process hundreds of people, just like themselves, who are coming to Washington to tell their stories to Senators and Congressmen in the hopes that we will do something. There are some in the Senate who don't want to help them at all. They don't believe they should receive any help in any way whatsoever. There are others who say: Let's put it off. Let's do it sometime, maybe next year. Next year is coming soon, and under the President's decision, on March 5 of 2018--just a few weeks from now--there will be no DACA protection whatsoever. It means that today, 122 a day of these DACA-protected young people will fall out of protected status. March 5 of next year, the number goes to 1,000 a day--1,000 a day--who will be subject to deportation, uncertain about what their future might be. I think it is time for us to do something, and I hope that we can do it on a bipartisan basis and do it in a timely fashion. It is important that we fix our entire immigration system, but let's not try to do everything that needs to be done on immigration when we should be taking care of these young people as our highest and first priority. I am ready to sign up for immigration reform. I was there before. It was called the Gang of 8--four Democrats and four Republicans. A few years ago, we came up with a comprehensive bill to pass the Senate. The Republicans in the House refused to even call for a hearing, let alone a vote on the floor. We should do our part to pass the new DACA, the new Dream Act. Do it before we leave this year. Do it this year so that we can spare these young people the anxiety and stress and fear they have because of the current situation and so that we can meet President Trump's challenge. I didn't like the fact that he eliminated DACA, but it is fair for him to say to us: You have 6 months, Congress. Now do something. I am not in control here. I am in the minority, being a Democrat. It is up to Republican leaders here. All I hear from Republican leaders is: Let's wait until next year and see if we have time to get around to this. We have the time, all the time we need now, to do this. I want to thank a number of people. First, I want to thank the 34 Republican House Members who, last week, sent a letter to the Speaker of the House, Paul Ryan, saying that we should fix the DACA system before we leave this year. Thank you to those 34 Republicans. In this Chamber, I want to thank 6 or 10 Republican Senators who have either cosponsored the Dream Act or are now actively engaged in helping to rewrite its replacement in the Senate. I am sure this kind of bipartisanship is a surprise to those who follow Congress, but it is an indication that many people share my belief that it is a simple matter of justice to give these young people their chance to become part of America's future. I started a few years ago, when the Dreamers worked up the courage to declare publicly that they were undocumented--frightening their parents but giving them some unity and identity in America. I started coming to the floor when they sent me their color photos and telling their stories because there is no speech I could give that matches the stories of their lives. Each time I tell a story, I know it makes a difference. I know the people who are watching this on C-SPAN and those who are in the Galleries here in the Senate pay close attention because we are talking about real lives and real people. Tonight I want to tell you about Carla Martinez. Carla Martinez was brought to the United States from Mexico at the age of 8. She grew up in the Austin and Pflugerville area of Texas, and she was an excellent student. In middle school and high school, she enrolled in advanced placement and community college courses, and she was recognized as an AP scholar student. In high school, she participated in the band, and she worked and volunteered in her community. During her senior year, Carla would go to school from 9 a.m. until 2:30 in the afternoon, then she would work from 3 in the afternoon until 11 at night and only then start her homework. In August 2012, Carla began her studies at the University of Texas, San Antonio, obtaining a bachelor's degree in civil engineering. A student like Carla, who is undocumented, did not qualify for Federal Government assistance. It meant there was no Pell grant to help her pay for college or a Federal loan to help her pay for college. She had to work to earn the money to pay her way through school. Something which many people would shrink away from, she accepted the reality of being undocumented in America. Because she was ineligible for financial aid, she worked to support herself, and she often had to choose between food and buying books. During college, Carla was also an officer in a number of organizations, including the Society of Women Engineers. She was a College of Engineering Ambassador, which means she had to maintain a very high GPA at the University of Texas. During her summers, Carla interned at Alpha Testing and the San Antonio Water System while she also worked as an engineering camp counselor. In August of 2016, Carla was the first DACA recipient to study abroad with the University of Texas at San Antonio's Education Abroad Program. She studied in as part of the first group of students to participate in the Urbino, Italy, civil engineering program. Because she couldn't get financial aid, studying abroad was more difficult for her than the other students who were part of the program. Not only did she need the money to go to college, she needed to raise the money to pay for the study abroad. She never gave up. One of her professors said: Carla is a very dedicated student. She has excellent organizational skills and works well with her classmates. She is a team player. Her involvement with the College is fantastic--she has been an ambassador. In May 2017, Carla graduated from the University of Texas at San Antonio with a civil engineering degree and two job offers. Today she works full-time at M&S Engineering as a water/wastewater engineer. Her dreams for the future are to go back to school and get a master's in business and engineering and to give back by creating a scholarship program to help fund other engineering students. Carla wrote me a letter about her worries because of President Trump's decision to take away her protection from being deported from the United States. Here is what she said: ``Every day that passes, it's a day closer to not being able to work, not having a driver's license, and not being able to financially provide for my family as the head of the household.'' People like Carla are the reason more than 400 business leaders signed a letter to all Members of Congress urging us to do something and pass a bipartisan Dream Act. The letter says: Dreamers are vital to the future of our companies and our economy. With them, we grow and create jobs. They are part of why we continue to have a global competitive advantage. That gathering of Dreamers out on the Mall, just away from the Capitol dome here, are a lot of young people just like Carla. They are coming here in the hopes that Members of Congress will slow down in the hallways on the way to their office or to a committee hearing and just hear for a moment their stories--stories just like Carla's--stories that really beg us to do something. We know we have to, we know we should, and there is absolutely no reason to delay it. Why would we want this amazing young woman, who has done so many extraordinary things in her life, to live with this uncertainty 1 minute more than she has to? Why wouldn't we step up and do what we are supposed to do? I am working on this with colleagues. A number of Republican Senators have been sitting down in my office, even today, trying to work out the details on a compromise. We are not quite there, but there was a determination in our meeting today to get there, to put something together. I would like to do this before we leave for the holidays. I think it is only right that we try our very best to achieve that, and I think we can. I think if Members of both sides show good faith, we can reach that goal. I want to especially thank Lindsey Graham, my cosponsor of the Dream Act, and Jeff Flake of Arizona, another cosponsor, who have stepped up and really just shown extraordinary commitment to this cause. We also have Lisa Murkowski and Cory Gardner as well who are cosponsors of the same legislation, and there are other Senators who are working with us behind the scenes to get this done. Some of them I know are taking a political risk to do it, but they believe it is the right thing to do, and they want to be on the record to be part of the solution. I am looking forward to working with them. In a few weeks--maybe only 10 days now--Congress is going to adjourn to go home for the holidays, but Dreamers can't go home for the holidays because they really don't have a home. They are homeless in America because they are waiting on us to come up with the legislation that defines their status and gives them a future. Hundreds of thousands of Dreamers can't enjoy the holidays the way many of us can because of their concern about being deported from the United States of America, separated from parents, brothers and sisters, friends, family, and loved ones. When we introduced the Dream Act, Senator Lindsey Graham, a Republican from South Carolina, said: ``The moment of reckoning is coming.'' Well, that moment is here. Congress has the responsibility to do our job to make the Dream Act the law of the land before the end of this year or bear the responsibility for forcing hundreds of thousands of talented young immigrants out of the workforce and putting them at risk of immediate deportation. The question we face is very basic, Will the United States of America be a better nation if Carla is forced to leave? This woman's determination, her drive, and her talent have brought her to this glorious moment when she finally graduated college. With this degree and with this education, she can offer us so much more and really serve America and its future. This is the country she loves. She deserves the respect of this country, and she deserves the determination of the Members of the Senate to take this up as a highest priority in the closing days of this Senate session. I yield the floor.

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.