Richard Durbin

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, last Friday I had a meeting in Chicago with about 50 in attendance. It was Friday morning, and we gathered groups of people from across the city of Chicago and the State of Illinois who were focusing on one make-or-break issue for many of us. It was an emotional issue, one that caused many to break down in tears as they told me their stories. It is the reason I have come back to the floor of the Senate today and every day since the election to talk about one specific issue that I believe is important for this Nation to reflect on. Mr. President, 16 years ago a young lady contacted my office. Her name is Tereza Lee. She had been brought to the United States from Korea at the age of 2. She had grown up in Chicago with a family of modest means. During the course of her childhood, she signed up for what is known as the Merit music program in Chicago. They offered free instruments and free musical instruction to kids from low-income families. It is a great program. Tereza Lee signed up, and it turned out she had an extraordinary talent at piano. When she came to contact my office, it was as she was leaving high school and applying to be accepted at the best music schools in the America--Juilliard in New York and the Conservatory of Music in Manhattan. She went to fill out the application, and when it came to a question of her citizenship and nationality, she wasn't certain what to put. Her mother suggested that she call our office, and she did. We told her that under the law she was undocumented, brought here at the age of 2 on a visitor visa. Her mother had never filed any papers for her. She had grown up in America thinking she was an American citizen like her brother and sister who were born here, and she came to realize at the age of 17 or 18 that in the eyes of the law she had no legal standing in America. The law is pretty harsh for people like Tereza. The law says she needs to leave the United States for 10 years and apply to return to the United States. Where would she go--to Korea? She had never been there. She grew up in Brazil for a short period of time. She didn't speak the language. She doesn't speak Portuguese. She was caught in the middle. That is why I introduced the DREAM Act. It said that young people brought to the United States by their parents before the age of 16, if they finish school and have no serious criminal issues, should be given a chance to go to school further and have a legal status in America and, ultimately, to earn their way to citizenship--going to the back of the line and waiting their turn but at least setting that as their goal. I introduced that bill 15 years ago. It has never become law, but there are 2.5 million people in that circumstance in America. Six years ago, the President of the United States created something called DACA, the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, by an Executive action. As a result of that action, President Obama allowed these eligible DREAMers--as they have come to be known--to receive DACA status. In order to do it, they have to apply, come out of the shadows, declare themselves, file a fee of about $500 with the government, go through a criminal background check, and then be given temporary--only temporary--legal status so they can't be deported and can legally work, which is renewable every 2 years. As of today, 744,000 young people have done that. Many of them were in the room--at least some of them were in the room in Chicago last Friday. They are not certain what is going to happen next. The new President has promised to end DACA. If he ends it, what happens to these young people? For instance, there are 28 of these DACA young people who are in medical school at Loyola University in Chicago--28 students who are undocumented who are there without any Federal Government assistance, and most of them have promised to give a year of service to the State of Illinois in rural areas and poor neighborhoods when they become doctors. If they lose their DACA status, they lose their ability to work legally in the United States and they cannot go through the clinical experience, which is part of becoming a doctor. They would have to drop out of medical school. There is one thing we can say for certain: We don't have an oversupply of doctors serving inner cities and rural areas in my State and across the Nation. We need these doctors. If DACA changes, if it is eliminated, what will happen to these young people? That is a challenge which I face, and other Members have as well. I salute Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. He is working with me on legislation to address this, to at least give a temporary status to these DACA-eligible young people while we debate immigration reform in a larger context. There are important issues at stake, but the most fundamental issue is one of fairness and justice. These young people did nothing wrong. They were brought to this country by their parents. They have grown up in this country, gone to our schools, and there are some amazing stories of what they have done with their lives. I wish to tell you one of those stories. I have done this over 100 times now on the floor of the Senate. This is Barbara Olachea. In 2002, when Barbara was 5 years old, her family brought her to the United States from Mexico. She grew up in Phoenix, AZ, and she knew she would face challenges, being undocumented. Her older sister had been accepted to Arizona State University but couldn't afford to go to school there. As an undocumented immigrant, she is not eligible for Federal financial assistance. Arizona law specifically prohibits State financial assistance to DREAMers such as Barbara and her sister. During her freshman year in high school, a mentor told her that as a DREAMer, ``You're going to have to try harder than everybody else.'' Barbara said: Those words confirmed what I had known all along. Although I was only starting high school, I began to dread what most students anticipate with excitement: graduation day. What if I got into my dream school, but I still couldn't go because I couldn't afford it? In high school, Barbara was a great student and was involved in many extracurricular and volunteer activities. She was a member of the Academic Decathlon team for 4 years and team captain when she was a senior. She was a member of student government, yearbook, and homecoming. She volunteered to tutor middle school students and worked part time to save money for her education. She participated in a number of programs at Arizona State University, including the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism. She recorded a story about her life that was aired on National Public Radio. This experience sparked her interest in journalism and led to an internship at KJZZ, the Phoenix affiliate for NPR. Last year Barbara graduated as valedictorian of her high school class with a 4.5 grade point average. As a result of her accomplishments, Barbara was accepted at Dartmouth College, an Ivy League school, where she is now a sophomore. Barbara wrote a letter to me and said this about DACA: I am very grateful for DACA, as it allowed me to work and not be deported to a country I do not know and have not been to since I was five. Just like thousands of other undocumented students in the United States, I have grown up and become accustomed to the culture here. The U.S. is where I belong and I want to be a contributing member of society, as I have proved in my 13 years here. Barbara and other DREAMers have so much to give. They are young, they are idealistic, they are energetic, and they are amazing. These young people have overcome odds that many young people never face in their lives. To think that in your freshman year of high school, you are reflecting on the fact that even if accepted to college, you may not be able to go--that was her future as she saw it then. If DACA is eliminated, Barbara will lose her legal status and could be deported to Mexico--a country where she hasn't lived since she was 5. Will America be a better country if Barbara is deported or if she stays here and uses her talent, her determination, her energy, and her inspiration, for our future? I think the answer is clear. Now is the time for America, this Nation of immigrants, to come together and heal the wounds that divided us in this election. I am just hoping that this President-elect, when he reflects on Barbara and 700,000-plus other DACA eligibles, will realize that they can bring important values and achievements to America's future. I am hoping that in the Senate, we can overcome our differences--and there are many deep differences, political differences--and give these young people a chance. Senator Graham and I are basically working on a bill that says at least suspend their status so they won't be deported, so they can continue to work. Do that while we do our business here on the issue of immigration. That is only fair. It is only right. It is the right American way to approach an issue that can affect so many innocent American people. I yield the floor.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) is necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I come to the floor this morning to talk about an issue that I have raised many times from this very spot, and it is an issue relative to the undocumented young people living in America--undocumented because they are not legally in this country. They were brought here--many of them as infants, toddlers, or children--by their families. They were not aware of the family decision, other than the fact that they were in a car and moving into the United States. They didn't really appreciate where they came from. Many of them never knew where they came from. Some of them don't even speak the language of the country of their birth. They were brought here as children. They believed from the beginning they were part of America. In most, except in extraordinary circumstances, they were not even told of their immigration status at an early age. So they grew up going to school in America. They learned English. They pledged allegiance to the only flag they had ever known. They sang the national anthem of this country believing they were part of this country. At some point, though, there was this realization and disclosure that they were not. Legally, they weren't. They were undocumented. So these children were raised in the shadow of uncertainty--uncertain as to whether a knock on the door at any time of day or night might change their world forever; whether or not their parents might be deported from this country and they would have to go with them; or, God forbid, that something would happen to them and they would be deported. They lived with that fear for a long time. I came to understand it when a Korean girl in Chicago who was looking for an opportunity to go to college because of her musical skills, realized she was undocumented and might not be able to do it. So she came to our office, told us of her situation, and we tried to help. So 15 years ago I introduced a bill called the DREAM Act. The DREAM Act said that for young people brought to this country under the age of 16 and who have lived here successfully, completed school, and have no criminal record to disqualify them, we should give them a chance--give them a chance to become legal in America and give them a chance, from my point of view, to become citizens. I introduced the bill 15 years ago. It has been debated. The word DREAMer came out of it and has now become pretty well-known across America to describe this group of young people. A few years ago, I prevailed on the President of the United States, Barack Obama, to give them a fighting chance to stay here. So by Executive action, he created something called DACA. DACA is the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program. This would allow these young people, undocumented, to step forward and disclose their status, come up with a filing fee of almost $500, and go through a process where they were submitted to a criminal background check. If they cleared all the hurdles, they would be given a temporary--underline the word temporary--right to live in the United States without fear of deportation and to work in this country. So over the years, since the President's Executive action, 744,000 young people have come forward. Their lives are amazing. I have told their stories over and over. Imagine, if you will, that you lived in fear of being deported tomorrow or fear that your family would be broken up and how that would weigh on you as a young person. So they did something that was maybe rash in the eyes of their parents but heroic in my eyes. They stepped forward, out of the shadows, and said: If the United States of America has set legal standards for us to follow to stay here, we will comply with them. Their parents warned them and their friends warned them: You are turning yourself in. You are telling this government who you are, where you are, and where they can find you. But they did it anyway, and I encouraged them to do it, and many others did as well, saying: If you show good faith in this country, good faith in this government, I will do everything in my power to make sure it isn't used against you. Now we have reached a new stage in our history with a new President coming who has different views on immigration than the outgoing President. My concern, and a concern shared by millions across America, is this: What is going to happen to these young kids--744,000 of them-- who are currently in college, in high school, in professional schools, such as medical schools and law schools? They are doing amazing things with their lives, and yet things could happen immediately to change their status. I have talked to a number of my colleagues on the floor on both sides of the aisle about this, and there are pretty strong emotions about helping these young people. One of the leaders on this has been my friend and ally on immigration issues--on some immigration issues--and that is Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. He and I talked about introducing legislation that would give a temporary stay so these young people could be protected until Congress does its work and comes up with an immigration bill that addresses this issue and many more. Senator Graham and I discussed it again this morning, and we even hope to have this bill ready before we leave next week--a bipartisan effort to say to the new President: Give these young people a fighting chance. At least protect them until we have had a chance to act on the larger immigration issues before us. I hope that colleagues on both sides will join us. There has been a lot of talk about what the next Congress will look like and what we will do, how we will tackle the biggest issues of our time. The Affordable Care Act, for example, which I was proud to support, is clearly controversial. There wasn't a single Republican Senator who voted for it. Some want to repeal it and replace it. Some are suggesting we will repeal it, but do it with 2 years in advance. So 2 years from now there might be a new Affordable Care Act. That puts us in a responsible position of coming up with an alternative in that period of time. I don't know if that is how this conversation will end, but I would suggest the same logic could apply when it comes to immigration: At least give us the time to come up with an alternative on immigration, and during that period of time, let us protect these youngest people. The stories I have told on the floor say more about this issue than any words I can express, and I want to tell another one of those stories this morning. This is about a young man from Illinois. His name is Asael Reyes. Here is his picture. He has his University of Illinois at Chicago T-shirt on. He is an interesting young man. He came to the United States at the age of 5, brought here from Mexico. He grew up on the North Side of Chicago. He is a bright young man, but he learned he was undocumented early in life. He really got despondent over the thought that he could lose everything and have to be forced to leave America. His classes were a challenge to him, and with this fear in his mind he started doing very poorly. In fact, he dropped out of high school. He said it weighed heavily on his mind that he might have to leave. He said: I felt that because of my status, I had no future. As a result, my grades and attendance plummeted and I struggled to do anything productive. Then, in 2012, President Obama announced DACA, and everything changed for Asael Reyes. Here is how he explains it: DACA meant that I had a future worth fighting for, and because of that I returned to school and reignited my passion for study. Because of DACA, I want to do whatever I can to contribute to my country. When Asael says ``my country,'' he means the United States of America--the only country he has ever known. In his senior year in high school, this young man turned his life around because of DACA. He improved his grades, he was active in his community, he was head of his school's fund raising committee, he volunteered in a mentoring program, and he worked full time to support himself and his family. You see, young people like him--undocumented-- don't qualify for any Federal assistance to go to college. If you want to go to college, you have to pay for it. For most of them, it means working pretty hard to come up with the money to do it. Today Asael is in his sophomore year in the Honors College--the Honors College--at the University of Illinois at Chicago. He is a double major in psychology and political science, and he has a perfect 4.0 grade point average. Talk about a turnaround. He is involved with student government, leads a recreational bike club called College of Cycling. Every week he delivers food from the college dining halls on bike to a local homeless shelter. This effort has inspired other student groups to start similar initiatives. He mentors middle school students, and he is the youngest board member of the Erie Neighborhood House--a place I have visited many times--a social service agency that provides assistance to low-income families in the city of Chicago. In addition to all this, he works part time as a security guard at local events like Cubs baseball games and Bears football games. Asael dreams of working in Chicago's city government someday. He says: ``I have a passion for my city, and I feel an obligation to do whatever I can to make it great by serving its communities.'' This is one story--one story out of 744,000. Will America be better if Asael Reyes is given his chance to stay here to make this a better nation? Of course, it will. At an early age, this young man was able to do a turnaround just on the hope that someday he might be able to live in this country legally. There are so many stories just like his. In that same city of Chicago, at Loyola University School of Medicine, there are 28 students who are undocumented. The school opened up competition, and some of the brightest kids around America for the first time saw a chance for an undocumented student to be a doctor. They have to sign up, incidentally--borrowing the money from the State of Illinois for their education--to serve a year of their lives as doctors in underserved areas of Illinois, in rural areas, and in the inner city, for each year they go to medical school. They willingly do it. They are prepared to give back. Asael is prepared to give back. The question is, Will we give them a chance? I am not an expert in the area of social media, but yesterday we tweeted a short message about this DACA challenge and what is going to happen to these 744,000 young people across America. The hashtag ``save DACA'' went out. My staff reports to me--and they are expert on this, I am not--in the span of 2 hours, we were trending across the United States of America. Six million people saw this hashtag over 10 million times. Think of that, 6 million people in 2 hours. It touched them what can happen to this young man and so many others. So will Congress rise to this challenge? Will Democrats and Republicans come to the rescue of these young people who are asking for just a chance--brought to this country not by their decision but the decision of their parents--asking for a chance now to have a life? I hope we will. It will be good for them. It will sure be good for America.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, let me just echo the comments of our Democratic leader, Senator Reid, in relation to Senator Mikulski. I will save a few moments perhaps next week to speak my own tribute to her and give my own reminiscences. But I didn't want to abruptly change the subject without saying I am in total agreement with Senator Reid in terms of the quality of service and friendship that we have had with the senior Senator from the State of Maryland.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, on January 3, there will be a new Senate sworn in. Members come down this aisle, to be sworn in over here by the Vice President of the United States, to become Members of the U.S. Senate. It will be the passing of the Senate seat in our State from Senator Mark Kirk to Senator-elect Tammy Duckworth. I would like to say a few words about my colleague Mark Kirk. For the last 6 years, Mark and I have had a very positive professional relationship. The night he won the election, I was standing with his opponent Alexi Giannoulias when Alexi made the call to Mark Kirk to congratulate him. Mark asked that I take the phone, and I did. He said: I want to work with you. I know we just competed against one another in the election, but we now have a responsibility together to represent the State of Illinois, and we started a positive working relationship--a relationship based on mutual respect. One of the things we did was to continue a tradition. Since 1985, my mentor and colleague in the House, and my predecessor in the Senate, Paul Simon of Illinois, started a Thursday morning breakfast, inviting people from Illinois who were in Washington and those who wish they were from Illinois, to come in for free coffee and donuts at no taxpayer expense. It was an hour-long public meeting so we could talk about what was happening in the Senate and then answer any questions and pose for pictures if they wanted them. I asked Mark Kirk to continue this, even though we were of opposite political faith, and we did, for a long time. We worked together to make sure the people of Illinois felt welcomed. We often took differing views on issues--that is understandable--but we did it in a civil way. People said they thought it was one of the highlights of their trip to see two Senators from two different parties working together. We did--and not just on those Thursday mornings. We found reasons to do it on the floor. In the vast majority of cases, when it came to filling Federal judicial vacancies, Mark Kirk and I worked together to agree. Rarely did we disagree on those who needed to be chosen. As a result, we have had a pretty good record of filling vacancies in the State of Illinois. Then, of course, it was in 2012 that a disaster struck and Mark Kirk suffered a stroke. It was almost a life-ending experience. He is lucky--lucky--to be alive today. He knows it, and we all know it too. I primarily kept in touch with his staff, and with him, during the course of his rehabilitation after that stroke. It was a calendar year he had to give to rehabilitation, to learn how to walk again and speak again and do the basic things we take for granted. It was an extraordinary show of courage and determination on his part. Finally, before he could return to the Senate, I visited with him and saw him some 10 months after the stroke and realized the devastation he weathered and how much he had managed to recover because of his sheer determination. The one thing he told me, though, was that he was determined to come back to the United States Senate and walk up those steps right into the Senate Chamber. He was working every single day on treadmills and with rehab experts to reach that day when he could get out of a car and walk up those steps. He asked me if I would ask other Senators to join him--especially his close friend Joe Manchin, a Democratic Senator from West Virginia, and we did. That day came and it was an amazing day. He started at the bottom of those steps and worked his way up, all the way into the Senate Chamber, to the applause of his colleagues--Democrats and Republicans--all the way up those steps. We realized what an amazing recovery he had made. Our colleague Tim Johnson of the State of South Dakota had gone through a similar devastating experience. Mark Kirk said many times, when he was about to give up, he thought, Tim Johnson got back to the Senate. I can get back there if I work hard enough. He did just that. He was an exceptional colleague of mine in the Senate. There were a lot of things we agreed on. One of them was Lake Michigan. As a Congressman from the 10th Congressional District, which is on the shores of Lake Michigan, he was always committed to that lake. After the election, when the results didn't come out as he wished, I sat down with him and said: Mark, what do you want me to do in memory of your commitment to public service? He said: Do everything you can to protect Lake Michigan. And I am going to. I asked his successor Tammy Duckworth to join me in that effort, and we will in his name and in his memory. I thank him for the service he has given to our State, the service he has given our Nation as an officer in the Navy Reserve, and for the years he put in as a staff member to Congressman John Porter, for the work he did in the House of Representatives representing the 10th Congressional District, and for his term in the United States Senate. It has been a pleasure and an honor to serve with him. Despite our political differences, I count him as a friend, as an ally, and as a true champion for the State of Illinois. I wish my colleague Mark Kirk the very best in his future endeavors. Mr. President, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Massachusetts for calling us together on the floor to discuss this important bill, the 21st Century Cures Act. It is a bill I followed closely because I started off introducing the American Cures Act. My goal in medical research was inspired by Dr. Francis Collins at the NIH. He just told me point blank: If you want to increase the output of medical research, find cures for diseases and help innocent people, increase the spending at the NIH by 5 percent real growth a year for 10 years, and I will light up the scoreboard. That is what I set out to do. That is what the American Cures Act set out to do, including the Centers for Disease Control and the Department of Defense medical research. As is usually the case in Congress, it is no surprise when someone sees an idea and thinks they can do it a little differently and a little better so, in the House of Representatives, Congressman Fred Upton and Congresswoman Diana DeGette introduced the 21st Century Cures Act. Theirs was a different approach. I guess it reflected a difference in philosophy. What we see today is what has happened to an originally good idea as it worked its way through the House of Representatives over a long period of time. The simple concept of increasing medical research spending at NIH by 5 percent a year has now become a very complicated formula. Frankly, it is one I have very mixed feelings over. I look at it and think: It would have been so simple for us to make a national commitment on a bipartisan basis to increase NIH funding by 5 percent a year and to do it over 10 years. I know we would see the difference. Just to put things in perspective so we understand them, there are certain diseases now which are costing us dearly: Alzheimer's. We know about that, don't we. There is hardly a family in America who does not have someone in their family or a friend who has been stricken by Alzheimer's. Think of this for a moment. An American is diagnosed with the Alzheimer's disease once every 67 seconds--once every 67 seconds. Twenty percent--twenty percent of all the money we spend on Medicare in America is spent for Alzheimer's and dementia--one out of five dollars--but you add to that, one out of three dollars in Medicare is spent on diabetes, so between diabetes and Alzheimer's, over half of our Medicare budget is going to those patients. When we talk about the need to develop new drugs to intervene and, with God's blessing, to cure some of these diseases, we are talking about not only alleviating human suffering, we are talking about the very real cost of government and health care--the very real cost that we bear as individuals, as families, as businesses, as a government, and as taxpayers. In this bill are some positive things, this 21st Century Cures bill. I do want to highlight them because they are worthy; the fact that we are now going to commit ourselves to deal with issues such as opioids. The opioid-heroin epidemic in America is real, and we are not investing in what we need to treat it and deal with it. We need to have substance abuse treatment--much, much more than we have today. One out of six or eight people who are currently addicted are receiving treatment. We need to do dramatically better. This bill puts money into that. It also includes language, including some parts I offered as an amendment, that will deal with mental illness. Mental illness and substance abuse treatment are basically on the same track in terms of helping people. This bill addresses that. I am glad it does. I think that is very positive. What is disappointing about this bill--there are several things. First, the money we are spending in this bill largely comes from one source, prevention--health care prevention funding in the Affordable Care Act. How important is that? Do you know how that money is being spent? We have something called the 317 vaccination program. What it says is, if you come from one of the poorest families in America, we will pay for our children to be vaccinated so they don't have to worry about the diseases that can change the life or even take the life of an infant. The 317 vaccine program, half of the money comes from the prevention funds we are raiding for medical research. Does that make sense; that we are going to take money away from prevention and vaccination to invest in new drugs to treat diseases? We can prevent these diseases in the first place with adequate vaccinations. It is a warped sense of justice in America that we would eliminate the health care prevention funds to pay for health care research funds. It is a zero sum as far as I am concerned. It is not just a matter of vaccinations. When you look at other things: 43 percent of the money that is spent on diabetes in America--prevention of diabetes in America--is through the prevention fund in the Affordable Care Act. That figure tells us that if we can invest on getting people to change their lifestyles, sometimes very slightly, or to take certain drugs, they can avoid the onset of diabetes. So we are cutting the prevention funds for diabetes in order to pay for more research for cures for diabetes. Does that make sense? Let me ask you about this: tobacco. A lot of my career in Congress has been focused on tobacco, the No. 1 avoidable cause of death in America today. Tobacco cessation programs pay off many times over. They are paid for by the prevention funds we are now raiding for medical research. We are taking away the funds to prevent tobacco addiction, and we are going to put more investment in trying to find cures for lung disease. There is something wrong with this thinking--completely wrong with this thinking. At the outset, I would say going to the prevention programs to pay for research programs is not clear thinking on the part of the people that are putting this together. We are told: Well, you better do it because the Republicans will take control of the White House and Congress next year and they are going to wipe out all of the prevention funds. They want to do away with the Affordable Care Act. We will pay a heavy price for that. We are starting to make that payment today. The second thing I want to say is, I am totally underwhelmed by the amount of money in this bill. When you take a look at the amount of money that is being spent here, it has dramatically changed as we have debated this bill. Originally, this was a $9.3 billion program for medical research, pretty hefty. Over a 5-year-period of time, this would have had a dramatic impact in a short period of time. Well, that changed. It is about half of that now. It is spread over 10 years. So the amount of money actually going to the National Institutes of Health any given year is interesting--$400 million, $500 million--but it does not match what was originally promised in the 21st Century Cures Act. Of course, the question is, if this money is put in out of prevention funding, will it be additive? Will it be more? Let me close by saying this. I know there are many who have strong feelings about this bill. I think it is a step in the right direction, but as Senator Warren has told us, it is at a hefty cost when it comes to some of the favors included in this bill for people who have friends in high places when it comes to the Congress. Here is what I can tell you with certainty. We have been able, for 2 successive years in the appropriations process, to do something important and historic. Let me tip a hat to my colleague from Missouri, Senator Roy Blunt, a Republican, who took up this cause in the Appropriations Committee and provided 5-percent real growth in spending for the National Institutes of Health last year and would do it again this year if the Republican leadership would allow us to bring his appropriations bill to the floor. We know we can make substantial new investments in NIH medical research. We have a bipartisan will to achieve it. We have the Appropriations Committee ready to act. Instead, what I am afraid of is this bill, which is a modest investment in medical research, will be the end of the conversation for many Members of Congress. When the time comes months from now, whether this passes or not--it probably will pass--but when the time comes months from now for us to debate medical research, many will say: Oh, we already checked that box. We have already done that with the 21st Century Cures bill. This bill is a pale imitation of the original bill. It is only a fraction of the funding which the Appropriations Committee has already put in to enhance medical research at the NIH. It overpromises and underdelivers. Some of the aspects of it--the troubling aspects--are off-label drugs and special favors for the contributors when it comes to medical treatment are out of place here. If we did not learn any lesson in this last election about draining the swamp, well, shame on us because the American people told us do it differently--do it openly. Bring in transparency and honesty in this effort. When it comes to medical research, we should expect nothing less. I yield the floor.

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, there are many disagreements in this Chamber and between the House and the Senate, but I think there is one thing we fundamentally agree on. Our system of immigration in this country is broken. There are many different ways to approach it in changing it, improving it, and fixing it, but most of us concede something is wrong. If we have 11 to 12 million people living in the United States who are not documented or not legal, by our definition-- and that has been going on for years, sometimes decades--it raises a serious question about whether our immigration system works, whether it is responsive, and whether it serves the best interests of the United States. Many of the people who are here once came to the United States on visitors' visas that they were supposed to ultimately see come to an end and leave, but they stayed. They got married. They had children in the United States who became citizens. Those who think that families represent the large share of undocumented people don't take a look at the families individually. They should. You may find in one household of a mother, father, and two or three children that only one person is undocumented, and it might be the mother. The one thing we also came to discover was that there were many people here who were undocumented, technically illegal under our system, and they were in that condition through no fault of their own. Well, who could that be? Children--children who were brought here as toddlers, infants, small kids, and brought in with their families. They had no voice in the decision to come to America, but the family did, and they grew up here. Some of them came at a very early age. They didn't speak the language of their original country. They never visited that country. From the start, they thought they were Americans. They went to school, went to class, put their hands over their hearts and pledged allegiance to the only flag they ever knew. They sang the only national anthem they really knew, and they believed they were Americans. At some point in their lives, maybe someone in the household said: Let me tell you a stark truth here: You are not legal by this Nation's standards. It was because of that group that I introduced a bill 15 years ago called the DREAM Act. The DREAM Act really defined this category of people who are undocumented, were brought here as children, grew up in America, graduated from our schools, and didn't create any criminal record in their lifetime, and they were hoping and praying that they would get a chance to stay in a legal status as citizens. That is what the DREAM Act was all about. It is just for these--they have come to be known as DREAMers--who came here as children and infants, to be given that choice. It was a few years ago that I wrote a letter to President Obama-- signed by Senator Lugar of Indiana, a Republican, who shared my feelings--and asked the President if he could do something to protect these young people from being deported. We had a number of Senators join me in a subsequent letter, and the President acted, creating something called DACA, the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program. What it boiled down to was that, if these undocumented young people who came here as young children would step forward, identify themselves to our government, pay about $500 in a filing fee, and go through a criminal background check, we would give them a 2-year temporary protection from being deported and give them a temporary right to work in this country. The DACA Program turned out to be a big success as 740,000 young people were eligible, signed up, and were cleared to be approved for this DACA status. Then came a change in administrations, which will happen in just a few weeks. Questions started being raised. What is going to happen to these young people--the ones who complied with the law as they were told it existed, who did a risky thing in identifying themselves to a government, paid their fee, went through the background check, and now are in the United States? I have met so many of them--thousands of them across this country, the DREAMers, those who are DACA eligible, those who are DACA approved. They are amazing stories. At the Loyola University Stritch School of Medicine in Chicago, they decided to open a competition in their medical school to allow these DACA-eligibles to apply--not to give them a special number of billets or positions in the school but to say: You can apply with everyone else. For many of these young people from across the United States who dreamed of being a doctor one day, this was the answer to a prayer, and they were ready for it. They competed and they won. I believe there are about 25, maybe more, who are currently medical students at Loyola in Chicago aspiring to be doctors. Now their life is complicated. They can't borrow money from the government to go to school. They are not eligible for any Federal assistance because they are technically undocumented. So we created a program through our State where they would be able to borrow the money to go to school on one condition; for every year of schooling that is provided by these loans, they have to pledge 1 year as doctors to serve in underserved areas of our State, whether it is in the inner city or the rural areas. So here are, at the moment, 25 aspiring DREAMers in the Loyola School of Medicine who will be giving us years of service in underserved communities in our State. Is that good for Illinois? Is it good for America? You bet it is. I am from downstate Illinois. There are many rural towns in our State that would beg for these doctors to come in so they can keep a local hospital open so they can have good medical talent when they need it. These DREAMers, who are now protected DACA today, are questioning what their future will be with a new President. There were some powerful words spoken during the course of this campaign about immigration, but I am heartened by the fact that President-Elect Trump, after the election, said he wanted to try to bind the wounds of this country. When asked specifically about immigrants, after some of the harsh things he said during the campaign, he said many of these immigrants are terrific people. Well, let me say to the President-elect, if you are looking for terrific people when it comes to immigrants, take a look at these DACA young people, take a look at these DREAMers. They are amazing. I believe I have come to the floor 100 times, maybe more, to tell these DREAMer stories because it is one thing, as I have just done, to describe them in general, but it is another thing to get to meet them. Some of these young people have had the courage to step up and say: You can tell my story. I will send you a photo. The story of one today is of Valentina Garcia Gonzalez. Valentina was 6 years old when her family brought her to the United States from Uruguay in South America. She grew up in the suburbs of Atlanta, GA. A very bright child, she learned English quickly. She said: After that, I became my parents' right hand. Everything and anything that involved speaking to the outside world meant I was in the front, translating and representing my parents. It was a lot of responsibility for a young undocumented kid. In addition to this responsibility, Valentina turned out to be quite a good student. In middle school she received the President's Education Award not once but twice--once from President Bush and then again from President Obama. In high school, Valentina was an honor graduate and an Advanced Placement Scholar. She was a leader in student government, a member of the Beta Club--a national academic honors program--and Peer Leaders, where she mentored younger students. She somehow also found time to be president of the school's environmental group and managed the varsity basketball team. Valentina was quite a student, but Georgia State law bans undocumented students from attending that State's top public universities. As a result, she applied and was accepted to Dartmouth College, an Ivy League school in Hanover, NH. She is now a sophomore at Dartmouth, where she is a premed student majoring in neuroepidemiology. You see, Valentina's dream is to become a doctor, to help people, and to give back to her community. To help pay for her few tuition, she works as a projectionist at a local theater. Keep in mind, as an undocumented student, she is ineligible for any Federal Government assistance. She still finds time to volunteer as a mentor for kids in the local community schools, and in a letter to me she said the following about DACA, President Obama's program: I am beyond grateful because, by receiving DACA, the U.S. has given me an opportunity to give back to this country that has given me so much. This is my country. I have worked hard to prove myself worthy in the eyes of my American counterparts and knowing that I am in a weird limbo in regards to my legal status doesn't make me sleep any easier. My name is registered with the government, so I might be deported if they decide to end DACA. Let me say clearly to Valentina and the other DREAMers like her. I am going to do everything in my power as a U.S. Senator to ensure that DACA continues and to protect them from deportation. Many came forward, against the best advice of their parents, who say: You are registering with a government that can deport you. But they had confidence that if they followed the law, as it was described to them, if they were open and honest, America would treat them fairly. That is all I am asking. For the 740,000 currently protected by DACA, and for the others who are eligible for it, who will go through a background check and pay their fee, we are asking for fairness. These young people came here as kids. They had no voice in the decision to come to America. Now they want us to be their voice in terms of their future in America. Would America be better if Valentina was deported back to Uruguay, a country where she hasn't lived since she was 6 years old? Will it be stronger if we lose Valentina as a doctor, serving a critical part of America? The answer is clear. Now is the time for America, this Nation of immigrants, to come together and heal the wounds that divided us during the election. I hope President-Elect Trump will understand and will continue the DACA Program that provides some fairness, some opportunity for these amazing young people. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, 15 years ago, a woman contacted my office in Chicago because she had a problem. It turned out that her daughter, who was about 17 years old or 18 years old at the time, had an extraordinary musical talent and had been accepted as a student at the Manhattan School of Music, as well as at the Juilliard School in New York. The problem was that her daughter was undocumented. She brought her little girl to the United States at the age of 2. This Korean girl, Tereza Lee, was raised in the United States by a family of very modest means, but she showed extraordinary talent at music, so much so that she was accepted at these great schools. When she went to fill out the application form and they asked for her nationality or citizenship status, she turned to her mother and said: What should I put here? Her mother said: Well, I never filed any papers after we brought you to this country, so I don't know. They called our office. The law was very clear. This young girl, who for 15 or 16 years had grown up in Chicago in modest circumstances, gone to school, done well, and excelled in her music, was in fact undocumented. Under the law of the United States of America, the only recourse for her--and it is still the case--was to leave this country for 10 years and apply to come back. I thought to myself: This little girl had nothing to say when the family decided to move to the United States when she was 2 years of age. She wasn't consulted. She didn't make a conscious decision. She, in fact, did everything she was expected to do in her life. She grew up believing that she would be in America, that she would be part of this country's future, but she has this undocumented status, an uncertain status. That is why, 15 years ago, I introduced the DREAM Act. It said to young women and men such as Tereza Lee: We will give you a chance. If you were brought to the United States as a child, you have gone through school and done well, and you have no serious criminal issues that worry us, we will give you a chance to earn your way into legal status and ultimately citizenship. The DREAM Act was introduced 15 years ago. Over the last 15 years, it has passed in the House some years and in the Senate in other years. It has never become the law of the land. It was a few years ago that I wrote a letter to then-President Obama--still President Obama--and asked him, as a cosponsor of my DREAM Act, could he do something to help these young people who were fearful they were going to be deported. Republican Senator Lugar of Indiana joined me in the letter, and later some 20 other Senators joined as well. President Obama studied it and asked his Attorney General and others to find a path, and he created an Executive action. That Executive action allows those who have been in a status such as Tereza Lee's a chance under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program, or the DACA Program, to sign up with the government, to register with the government, to pay a filing fee of almost $500, and to go through a criminal background check. For that, if approved, they receive a 2-year temporary and renewable status. That status would allow them to stay in the United States without fear of deportation and would allow them to work. Since the President's Executive action was launched, some 744,000 young people have taken advantage of it. Many of their parents warned them. They said: Be careful. If you sign up with this government and tell them you are not here legally, they might use it against you. Some of those students, young people, and their parents came to me with that concern. I said to them: As long as you are following the law, as long as you are paying the fee, submitting yourself to a criminal background check, and understand this is only a temporary situation that can be renewed, do it. Be part of America. Be part of obeying the law, following the law, and, ultimately, I think it will be to your benefit. When I gave that advice, I could not have imagined that we would be facing a new President in just a few weeks with a totally different view on immigration. That President-elect, Donald Trump, has said some very hurtful and divisive things about immigration during the course of his campaign. Fortunately for us, it appears he is reflecting on those statements now, and some of those he is modifying, if not changing. I hope he will do the same when it comes to this. These 744,000 DACA- eligible persons who are currently in the program, as well as others, should be given their chance in America. As long as they are no threat to our country, we should capitalize on their talents, on the education that they have received that we paid for, and give them a chance to make America better. I have stood on the floor many times--and I will today--to tell the story of just one of these students. It is one thing to talk about what they might bring to this country, and it is another thing to get to know them a little bit. This is a photograph of Yuri Hernandez. Yuri was 3 years old when her family brought her to the United States from Mexico. She grew up in Coos Bay, OR. In high school she was an honor roll student and was active in her community. She was an active member of the Key Club and the Kiwanis service program for students. She was voted homecoming princess of her high school and jubilee princess of Coos Bay. She attended the University of Portland, where she graduated with a bachelor's degree in social work. She received numerous awards and was involved in many extracurricular and volunteer activities. She was vice president of the Social Work Club, a board member of the National Association of Social Workers, and a member of Oregonians Against Trafficking Humans. When you hear about her record in college and what she has achieved, remember this: This young lady did not qualify for one penny of Federal assistance. Because she is undocumented, because she is a DREAMer, she was ineligible for the things that many students take for granted in America, such as Pell grants and government loans. Yuri had to find another way to do this. She had to work her way through school, borrowing money from parents. She faced hardships that many students don't face, but she overcame them. That speaks to her, her character, and her determination. She volunteered as a tutor for at-risk elementary school students. During her senior year in college, she was a full-time student and a full-time worker to pay for her college education. Do we need persons in America such as Yuri--so determined, so committed to their future that they are willing to make sacrifices many students don't make? Of course we do. Yuri is now a graduate student at the University of Michigan School of Social Work. Again, she doesn't qualify for any government assistance to go to school. She is planning on a graduate degree, a master's in social work, in the fall of 2017, and she still finds time to tutor and mentor high school students. She wants to give back to America. She wrote a letter to me about the DACA Program and said: DACA opened a lot of doors. I no longer wake up every day fearing that I could be picked up and deported [out of the United States]. . . . DACA changed my life completely and allowed me to use my education. Would America be better if Yuri were deported, if she were sent away from this country to a country she has never known, one from which she was taken away when she was a child of 3 years of age? I think the answer is obvious. For her and for thousands such as her, this is a moment of testing. Will we in the United States of America, this Nation of diverse immigrants, this diverse Nation that believes in fairness and justice, give to those DREAMers, those DACA recipients, their chance to prove themselves? Will we hold these children responsible for decisions made by their parents or will we give them their own chance in life? Over the last few weeks, I have been home in Illinois, and I have talked to a lot of people who have come to know these DACA recipients and DREAMers. Many of these young people are despondent. With the new President, they are afraid they are going to lose any protection they currently have from deportation. Some of them have been driven to despair. Some have decided to leave the country, and, in some rare cases, there have been cases of suicide from their despondency. We can do better, America. We can say to these young people that, while Congress debates immigration and its future, we are going to make certain they are not penalized and hurt in the process. For Yuri and thousands just like her, we owe it to them to give them their chance. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) is necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I want to take a few moments to acknowledge Bernarda ``Bernie'' Wong, founder and president of the Chinese American Service League, CASL--and Esther Wong, cofounder and executive director of CASL. Earlier this year, Bernie and Esther announced they would be retiring on December 31, 2016. Nearly 40 years ago, along with eight Chinese American friends, Bernie and Esther gathered over potluck dinners to discuss the needs of the Chinese community in Chicago. These discussions led to the creation of the Chinese American Service League, commonly referred to as CASL. CASL began with the goal of teaching English as a second language to Chinese immigrants. But today, because of Bernie's leadership, CASL has become one of the largest Asian American social service organizations in the country, providing social support services from early childhood development through elder care. Born and raised in Hong Kong, Bernie moved to the United States in 1962 at the age of 18. Like many immigrants, Bernie came to the United States to further her education. She was awarded a full scholarship to attend Briar Cliff University in Sioux City, IA, and graduated in 1962 with a degree in social work. Before moving to Chicago, Bernie received her master's degree in social work from Washington University in St. Louis. Social work was in her blood. Her mother used tell her, ``Share and give. Even if you don't have much, you share it . . .'' And that is exactly what Bernie did, but it didn't come easy. When Bernie first came to Chicago, she faced push back from community leaders. They didn't want an outsider coming in and shining a light on their problems. Some considered it shameful. But that didn't stop Bernie. She went to the United Way and explained what she was trying to do. In 1979, they awarded her a special grant. She used it to start CASL. Today Bernie's vision for Chinese immigrants in Chicago has grown from an annual budget of $32,000 to $13 million and a handful of employees to 450, serving more than 17,000 of the community's most vulnerable. She once said, ``It's my job to know what the people in this community need. Then we can make a program available that will help them.'' That guiding principle has led Bernie and Esther to launch and oversee each of CASL's programs giving immigrants the tools to succeed in America, such as senior and child care services, family counseling, financial education, and employment training. Bernie has been the recipient of numerous awards, including the Champion of Change Award given by President Obama for her extraordinary leadership in the community. Her other awards include United Way of Chicago's Executive of the Year Award; Crain's Chicago ``100 Most Influential Women of Chicago;'' and the Chicago Historical Society's Jane Addams Making History Award. Bernie also chaired the Chicago mayor's advisory council on Asian affairs and was the first Asian appointed to the boards of United Way of Chicago and the Chicago Public Library. And just last month, her years of service were recognized with her very own street: Bernarda ``Bernie'' Wong Way, right outside the Chinese American Service League. What an honor. Since CASL's beginning, Esther Wong has been a faithful founding member. For more than two decades, she has served as chair of the program committee. Esther has been integral in CASL's success. So much so that, in 2002, Esther was recruited to assume the newly created executive director position. In this role, Esther has been responsible for expanding CASL's programs to include housing and financial education. She has also overseen several significant infrastructure improvements that have allowed CASL to provide critical safety net programs to the Chicagoland community. As a recipient of the mayor's Commission on Women's Affairs' Woman of the Year Award and the Asian American Coalition of Chicago's Community Services Award, Esther served on countless boards in the Asian American and immigrant community. She continues to serve on the boards of the National Coalition for Asian Pacific American Community Development, the Coalition for Limited English Speaking Elderly, and the Chicago Jobs Council. I will close with this. A few years ago, the Chicago Tribune interviewed Bernie. They asked how she would like to be remembered if she ever retired. She recalled a time when a janitor was sitting down eating lunch in the cafeteria. In China, you don't sit with your boss, so he was trying to leave. Bernie said, ``No, sit down.'' He told her, ``I've never seen a boss who wanted to include you.'' That is Bernie Wong's legacy. She simply wants people to know she cares and to make people feel included. After a career spanning nearly four decades at CASL, providing comprehensive and inclusive programs for immigrants and helping generations born in America realize their dreams, one thing is clear: Bernie and Esther care. I want to congratulate Bernie and Esther on two wonderful careers and thank them for their service to our community. I wish them and their husbands, Albert and David, all the best in the next chapter of their lives.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, during the Presidential campaign, which just concluded, President-Elect Donald Trump made some inflammatory remarks about immigration and immigrants. I condemned those remarks, as did many in both political parties, and I remain concerned about the impact that rhetoric has on America and the people who are living in the United States. On election night, Mr. Trump said, ``Now it is time for America to bind the wounds of division.'' As one step in bringing our Nation together, Mr. Trump should change his thinking on at least one aspect of immigration, and I hope even more. As the President-elect knows, we are, in fact, a nation of immigrants, and immigration makes America stronger. Like me, Mr. Trump is the son of an immigrant. His wife will be only the second immigrant in American history to serve as First Lady. During a recent interview, Mr. Trump acknowledged that millions of undocumented immigrants are ``terrific people.'' That is a good start; words matter. The tone the President-elect sets with the language he uses can help to bind the divisions in America, but actions matter as well. I hope that one of President-Elect Trump's first actions will be to pledge to continue the program known as DACA. It was 6 years ago that I sent a letter to President Barack Obama, and joining me in that letter was Senator Dick Lugar, a Republican Senator from Indiana. It was a bipartisan letter, and we asked President Obama to stop the deportations of young immigrants who grew up in this country. These young people have come to be known as DREAMers. They were brought to the United States as children. They grew up singing the national anthem in their classrooms and pledging allegiance to the only flag they ever knew--the American flag. These DREAMers are casualties of our broken immigration system. They were brought here as children, toddlers, infants, babies. They didn't have any voice in the decision of their family to come to America. They were brought here to live. We invested in them. We put them in our school systems. It really makes no sense, since many of them have become accomplished and promising young people, to give up on them now and deport them back to countries they have never known. The President of the United States, Barack Obama, responded. He established the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which is known as DACA. DACA provides temporary renewable legal status to immigrant students who arrived in the United States as children. What does it take? A student has to fill out an application form. When this Executive action went into effect, I joined with Congressman Luis Gutierrez of Chicago. We decided on the first day of eligibility we would set up some tables at the Navy Pier in Chicago, and we would welcome young people to come in and sign up. These were undocumented young people who had grown up in the United States, and now they had a chance because of the President's Executive action to ask for temporary protected status and a work permit. It cost money, almost $500. When they submitted their names, they also submitted their names for a criminal background check to make certain they had no serious criminal offense and they were no threat to this country. Congressman Gutierrez and I expected several hundred to show up. We had immigration lawyers ready to volunteer to help them fill out the forms. We were stunned. The night before, at midnight, they started lining up in the dark with their parents, and they waited all night to come into that room and to sign those applications so that they, as undocumented young people in America, would have a fighting chance to become part of America's future. That is all they asked for. They didn't ask for jobs. They didn't ask for government programs. They don't qualify for very many, if any. All they asked for was a chance--a chance to live here and not be deported and a chance to work here. So far, in the few years that DACA has been in effect, over 740,000 young people have signed up. They came forward, paid their fees, and went through the background checks. They were approved. Now they are working or going to school. DACA has allowed these DREAMers to make contributions to America that are valuable to all of us. They are soldiers, nurses, teachers, engineers, police officers, and they are aspiring to the highest levels of education in our country. These DACA recipients are making important contributions to our economy. A new study by the Center for American Progress finds that ending DACA would cost the United States $433.4 billion in gross domestic product over the next 10 years. These are not just bright young students; they are great workers. They will be great professionals. They will help people, and they will make America stronger. DACA is based on the DREAM Act. The DREAM Act is bipartisan legislation that I first introduced 15 years ago. If you are going to serve in the Senate, you have to be patient. I didn't dream I would be standing here 15 years later, still asking for the Senate to approve the DREAM Act. In the meantime, what President Obama did was to say we will protect these young people while Congress debates the future of immigration reform, but we will make sure that they can stay in this country without fear of deportation. If the DREAM Act is enacted into law--and, incidentally, it passed the Senate several years ago--it will give these undocumented students a chance to earn their way to legal status and citizenship. DACA is clearly legal. Like every President before him, President Obama has the authority to set immigration policy for his administration. DACA is also smart and realistic. It is a way to enforce our immigration laws the right way, to make sure that these young people who have done nothing wrong, who have no criminal problems, who have paid their fee and registered with the government are allowed to stay without fear of a knock on the door. The Department of Homeland Security has only enough funding to deport a small fraction of the undocumented immigrants in our country each year. President Obama has said he wants to focus those resources on those who should not be in the United States, those who could do us harm. That is just common sense. At the same time, the President said we shouldn't waste our resources on deporting young immigrant students who grew up in the United States and are making contributions to our future. During the campaign, President-Elect Trump pledged to rescind and end DACA. I believe that after his administration studies the issue, there is a chance he will reconsider when he comes to know these ``terrific people.'' I have come to the floor of the Senate now for over 10 years, telling the stories of these DREAMers. There was a time when they were afraid to come out publicly and tell America who they were. They had been warned by their parents since they were little kids to be careful. If you talk to the wrong person, if you do the wrong thing, if the police knock on the door, you may be deported along with the rest of your family, so be careful. As kids will, these young people across America have decided they are not going to hide who they are. They want to tell America their story, and I have tried to help them. When they have sent us their biographies, along with photographs, I have come to the floor on about a hundred different occasions to tell the stories of these DREAMers. Each one, in my estimation, is more amazing than the next, and today is no exception. This is Rey Pineda. In 1990, when Rey was 2 years old, his family came to the United States from Mexico. Rey grew up in Atlanta, GA. He worked hard and was an honor roll student in high school. He became the first member of his family to attend college. In 2010, he graduated with a major in philosophy from Southern Catholic College in Dawsonville, GA. Rey is a devout Catholic, and he decided to attend Mundelein Seminary in my home State of Illinois. Rey felt that God was calling him to be a priest, but his spiritual path was blocked. Rey is undocumented. Rey is a DREAMer. Then, in 2012, everything changed. President Obama's Executive action established DACA. In March of 2013, Rey was approved, filed his fee, went through the background check, and did everything he was asked to do. He received his DACA status, and he knew that at least for 2 years he would not be subject to deportation. That allowed him to become a deacon in the Catholic Church 2 months later, in May of 2013. In 2014, Rey entered the priesthood after he graduated magna cum laude from Mundelein Seminary in Illinois. He has a master of divinity degree. Today, Father Rey Pineda is a priest at the Cathedral of Christ the King in Atlanta, GA. He wrote me a letter, and here is what he said about DACA: Like many Dreamers, the U.S. is really the only country I know. DACA was an answer to many years of prayers. Without DACA I would not have been able to serve as a priest in my community. I believe my faith in God has brought me to this point in my life; but my faith in America's promise has pushed me to keep fighting for peace, justice, and opportunity in this great country I proudly call home. If DACA is eliminated--and that threat has been made--Father Rey Pineda will lose his legal status and be subject to deportation, being sent back to a country that he hasn't lived in since he was 2 years old. That would be a tragedy for Father Rey Pineda and his congregation and the hundreds of people who count on him as their priest. Consider this: There is a chronic shortage of Catholic priests in America. Since 1975, the number of priests has declined by 33 percent while the number of American Catholics has grown by 43 percent. Hundreds of parishes have been forced to close or consolidate. Nearly one out of five Catholic parishes in America have no priest. This shortage of priests is not limited to the Catholic Church. The problem is so serious that Congress has established a religious worker visa to allow people from overseas to come in on a visa and serve as priests in communities. It is happening all across my State of Illinois, and I bet it is happening in Iowa. If you go to parishes in rural areas, there will be priests from all over the world. I recently met one in Rome who was in Southern Illinois at Pinckneyville, and he was from Nigeria. At a time when the United States is actively importing ministers and priests from foreign countries, why do we want to deport Father Rey Pineda? This makes no sense. Listen to what Father Rey told me about his role as a priest who is an undocumented immigrant: I believe my entire journey has prepared me to be compassionate with the sufferings of many people I encounter. I look at my ministry as a calling to build bridges between people from all walks of life. Diversity sometimes brings challenges between people and I want to help heal those differences. After the most divisive election in recent memory, I believe that Father Rey Pineda and other DREAMers like him have an important role to play in healing the differences that divide America. I am hoping that President-Elect Trump will see this and will continue the DACA program. Let me be clear. If there is an attempt to shut down DACA, I will do everything in my power as a U.S. Senator to protect the DREAMers who have stepped forward and contributed their talents to our great country. Many of those DREAMers and their parents spoke to me that day at Navy Pier and ever since. They said: Senator, are you sure? Are you sure that we should sign up with this government? We have spent a lifetime trying to stay out of trouble, stay out of the view of people, not cause any problems, go about our business, raise our families, do our jobs, go to our church. If our children register with this government, will that come back at a future time and be used against us? At the time, I said--and I believe it now--that America would stand behind these young people. We will not allow them to be deported after what they have been through. We will not tell them that by complying with the requirements of our government, you have penalized yourself in the future. We want to give them a chance. Now is the time for America, this Nation of immigrants, to heal the wounds that divided us during this election. Let's start with the DREAMers, let's start with DACA, let's start with the young people who will make America better and stronger in the years to come. They are the best in this country. Let's make them the best for America's future. I hope and pray the President- elect's words and actions in the coming weeks and months will, in fact, bring us together. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DURBIN

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

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Boxer) is necessarily absent,

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Earlier this year, Linda Yu, one of Chicago's most respected and well-liked broadcasters, announced that she will anchor her final newscast next Wednesday, November 23, 2016. For more than 37 years, Linda Yu has reported the news in Chicago and set a high bar for those who follow. Linda is one of the special ones. She has an outstanding ability to connect with her viewers, which has ingratiated her to Chicagoans. A viewer once told her that ``when things go wrong, you make me feel safe.'' That's what Linda Yu means to Chicago. She is a comfort to a city during difficult times and a trusted voice. Linda is the consummate professional, class act, and trailblazer. As the first Asian American to anchor a news broadcast in Chicago, Linda has become a role model for children aspiring to the newsroom, regardless of race or gender. That is quite a legacy. Linda's story is a uniquely American story. Born in Xian, China, Linda moved to Hong Kong with her family when she was only 2 years old. Three years later, they immigrated to the United States, living in Pennsylvania and Indiana, before settling in California. In 1968, Linda Yu graduated from the University of Southern California with a bachelor of arts in journalism. Shortly after, she began her career at the ABC- owned affiliates KTLA-TV and KABC-TV in Los Angeles, before moving to what became her home away from home, Chicago, IL. In 1979, Linda joined Chicago's WMAQ-TV. Five years later, she joined ABC 7's 4 p.m. newscast. And for the next 32 years, it was the No. 1 newscast. How is that for a winning streak? Among her accolades, Linda Yu earned five Chicago Emmy Awards. Her first came in 1981, for a special newscast on the assassination attempt on President Reagan. One year later, Linda received her second Emmy for her report and coverage of a construction accident in Chicago's downtown loop. In 2005, Linda was honored by the Chicago chapter of the National Academy of Television Arts and Sciences with the prestigious Silver Circle, honoring her for 25 years of outstanding contributions to Chicago broadcasting. Linda also received the National Gold Medal from the National Conference of Community and Justice for her documentary ``The Scars of Belfast.'' Linda Yu has had an amazing career and is an extraordinarily accomplished professional. In her spare time, she volunteers at the Chinese American Service League, the March of Dimes, Asian Human Services and Juvenile Protective Association. She also cofounded the Chicago Chapter of the Asian American Journalists Association. But her proudest accomplishment is her family. The mother of a daughter, Francesca, and a son, Bryan, Linda now plans on spending more time with them and writing her next book. Her first book, a memoir, ``Living and Working in America, 15 lessons,'' published in Chinese, is a guide to help young Chinese woman in the global workplace. Her next book will focus on stories of prominent Asian woman entrepreneurs and political and cultural leaders in America. When Linda broke the news to her colleagues that she was ``moving on'' from ABC 7, she made sure not to use the word ``retire'' because she couldn't imagine retirement. So let me be clear, this is not the final chapter for Linda Yu. She will continue to write and be a role model for her community and countless young women around the world. I want to congratulate Linda Yu on her distinguished career and thank her for giving so much to the people of Chicago. She will truly be missed. I wish Linda and her family all the best.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, like the majority of Americans who supported the Democratic candidate for President in the most recent election, I was disappointed by the results. But last Wednesday, I publicly congratulated President-Elect Donald Trump. I believe the bedrock principle of America is that we select our leaders and then come together as a country to try to find common ground and move forward. On election night, the President-elect said: Now it is time for America to bind the wounds of division. To all Republicans and Democrats and independents across the Nation, I say it is time for us to come together as one united people. I agree with the President-elect's statement. During the campaign, President-Elect Donald Trump used incendiary and offensive language about immigrants and immigration. I condemned those remarks at the time. I remain concerned about their impact on our Nation. But all Americans have an obligation to give this incoming President a chance. I am hopeful that he will keep his promise of election night to bind the wounds of division, to bring our Nation together. If he does, I look for opportunities where we can work together. As a first step in bringing our Nation together, I hope Mr. Trump will change his rhetoric and his approach to immigration. As the President-elect knows, we are a nation of immigrants, and immigration makes us stronger. Like me, Mr. Trump is the son of an immigrant. When Mr. Trump takes the oath of office in January, the United States will have a First Lady who is an immigrant for only the second time in our history and for the first time since 1801 when President John Quincy Adam's wife, Louisa Catherine Adams, was the First Lady of the United States. During the campaign, Mr. Trump pledged to deport all 11 million undocumented immigrants, but in an interview with ``60 Minutes,'' he recently said he wanted to focus on deporting undocumented immigrants with criminal records. He acknowledged that millions of undocumented immigrants are ``terrific people.'' I wish to speak for a few moments about some of those terrific people. These words are important to me. I listened to them carefully. It was 15 years ago when I introduced a bill known as the DREAM Act. My cosponsor at that time was Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah. This bipartisan bill recognized the fact that many of the undocumented in America were brought here as children. They didn't make the family decision to get in the car, to head for America--adults did. Some of them were only infants. But they came to this country, and they have lived in this country since. They go to school in America. They stand and pledge allegiance in the classroom to the only flag they have ever known. They speak English, and they believe their future is in this country. These were the DREAMers, and our bill said: Give them a chance. If they finish school and they have no serious criminal record, give them a chance to earn their way to legalization and citizenship. Well, for 15 years this bill has been pending. Sometimes, it passes the Senate. Sometimes, it passed the House. It never quite passed both Chambers in the same year, and so it is still an aspiration and not legislation. It was 6 years ago when I wrote a letter to the President, President Obama, joined by Senator Dick Lugar, a Republican from Indiana. On a bipartisan basis, we asked the President of the United States to protect these young DREAMers who grew up in America from deportation. These kids deserve a chance. We have invested in them. We have given them a good education in American schools, and it makes no sense to squander their talents by deporting them to countries they barely know. The President, President Obama, responded. He established the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program, known as DACA. DACA provides temporary, renewable, legal status to immigrant students who arrive in the United States as children. Approximately 740,000 of these young people have come forward and signed up for DACA. DACA has allowed them a chance, without the fear of deportation, to contribute more fully to our country as soldiers, nurses, teachers, engineers, and police officers. DACA is based on the DREAM Act. It gives these undocumented students who grew up in this country a chance to earn their way toward legal status. It is clearly legal. Like every President before him, President Obama has had the authority to set immigration policy, and the Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the Federal Government has broad authority in this area. DACA is not just legal. It makes sense. The Department of Homeland Security only has enough funding to deport a small fraction of undocumented immigrants. So the President--our current President--and the President-elect say: Let's focus on those who might cause harm to America. I agree with them. That is just common sense. But at the same time, President Obama has said: Why would we want to waste resources deporting young immigrant students who grew up in this country and are making a great contribution? During the campaign, President-Elect Trump pledged that he would end DACA. I hope that he will reconsider that position. I have come to the floor over the last several years to tell the stories of these DREAMers. I can give speeches all day about who they are, but some of them have the courage to step up and really tell America who they are. Today I wish to speak to you about one of them. His name is Oscar Cornejo, Jr. In the year 2000, when Oscar was only 5 years old, his family came to the United States from Mexico. Oscar grew up in Park City. It is a small, northern suburb of Chicago, in my home State of Illinois. He was quite a student. In high school he was a member of the National Honor Society and an Illinois State scholar. He received several Advanced Placement awards and graduated high school magna cum laude. This is what Oscar said about his high school years: My parents always instilled in me the value of an education, which is one of the main reasons they decided to leave everything in Mexico and come to the United States. I dedicated myself solely to my education to honor the sacrifices my parents made. It was because of those outstanding academic achievements in high school that Oscar was admitted to Dartmouth College, an Ivy League school in Hanover, NH. He is the first member of his family even to attend college. Oscar has excelled at Dartmouth. During his freshman year, Oscar received the William S. Churchill prize for outstanding academic achievement and contributions to the college in the areas of ``fairness, respect for duty, and citizenship.'' Oscar serves on the student board that judges violations of the Dartmouth honor code. He cofounded and codirected the college's first immigrant rights organization, and now he is in his senior year at Dartmouth. He wants to be a teacher. He has applied to graduate school at the Institute for Recruitment of Teachers at Phillips Academy. He wrote a letter to me and said: When I received my DACA, the threat of deportation had been lifted and I felt I could actually achieve my dreams. DACA has allowed me to work for the first time and the money I earn goes to support my education and my family. Oscar and so many other DREAMers have so much to give to America. If we eliminate DACA, Oscar will lose his legal status. He will be subject to deportation at any moment, and he could be deported back to Mexico, a country where he hasn't lived for 15 years. Will America be a stronger country if we lose Oscar Cornejo or if he stays here and becomes a teacher? I think the answer is very clear. I hope that President-Elect Trump will consider that this young man is in a different category than someone who came into this country and committed a serious crime. This is a young man who did just the opposite. He led a good life. He was successful in high school. He has gone to college without any Federal assistance whatsoever. He doesn't qualify for a penny, yet he has excelled and still, despite all these struggles, wants to give back to this Nation, the only country he has ever called home. Losing him would be a loss to America. I appeal to the President-elect: Think long and hard about the future of this country. Realize that he and I--the President-elect and myself--as first-generation Americans, have to understand that it is immigration that has brought so much by way of diversity and talent to the great United States. We can't shut down DACA. That would be horrible. It would mean that 744,000 young people such as Oscar, protected from deportation, would wake up the next morning wondering if that knock on the door was the last they would hear as a resident of America. I am going to fight for Oscar and for the 744,000 who qualify for DACA and for the DREAMers like them who came here as children and simply asked for a chance. There is real division in the Senate, the House, and in the country when it comes to immigration. As I have told these stories on the floor--almost 100 of them now--I have noticed a number of my colleagues from the other side of the aisle say: That really is a different situation. This is a young child who should be given a chance. Now is the time for America--this Nation of immigrants--to heal our wounds that divided us during this election. I hope and pray that the President-elect, by word and action, in the coming weeks and months will truly bring us together.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, for 16 years, broadcaster Harry Caray was the voice of the Chicago Cubs. He wasn't in Yogi Berra's league linguistically. Harry Caray could turn a phrase. ``Holy cow!'' was one of Harry Caray's signature lines. Another legendary Harry Caray line that made people jump for joy was this: It might be. It could be. It is! A home run! Harry Caray loved baseball. He loved Chicago. He loved the Cubs. But most of all, he loved the Cubs fans, those generations of fans who packed Wrigley Field every year, almost certain that their team would lose but hoping for a miracle. Harry Caray once said of the citizens of Cubs Nation: This has been the remarkable thing about the fans in Chicago, they keep drawing an average of a million-three a year, and when the season's over and they've won their usual 71 games, you feel that those fans deserve a medal. Well, Harry Caray passed away in 1998. But like every Cubs fan, he believed until his final breath that the Chicago Cubs, those loveable losers, would one day reclaim the title as Major League Baseball's World Series champions, a title they held and won in 1908. Well, Harry Caray was right. The day came. Miraculously, in the early morning hours of November 3, in the 10th inning of the 7th and deciding game against the gritty, formidable Cleveland Indians, the Chicago Cubs won the 2016 World Series. That heart-stopping game 7--in fact, the whole series--was a contest for the ages and one that Cubs fans will be talking about for generations. Let me say it again. The Cubs' improbable, come-from-behind World Series championship marks the first time since 1908 that the Cubs won the World Series. Their 108-year drought with our World Series trophy marked the longest losing streak of any team in any sport in the United States of America. But all those years of dashed hopes and deferred dreams are history. The curse of the billy goat and the omen of the black cat are all dead. Fly the W and hoist the trophy. The 2016 Chicago Cubs are the World Series champs, the very best in baseball. They posted the winningest record in Major League Baseball, with 103 victories to 58 losses, and they finished 17\1/2\ games ahead in their division, ahead of the St. Louis Cardinals, always a formidable baseball team. It was the first time the Cubs had posted the most wins in baseball since 1945 and the first time the Northsiders had won 100 games since 1935. In postseason play, the Cubs launched a ninth-inning comeback to take the National League division series against the Giants in four games. Then it was the Dodgers. After losing in back-to-back shutouts, trailing the Dodgers 2 to 1 in the series, the Cubs rallied to beat the Dodgers in six games and claimed their first National League championship in 17 years. For generations, the World Series has broken many a Cubs fan's heart. After winning the Fall Classic in 1907 and 1908, the Cubs went on to lose the World Series in 1910, 1918, 1929, 1932, 1935, 1938, and 1945, their last World Series appearance until this year. Yet, against history and against reason, as the 2016 World Series began, Cubs fans dared to believe. Maybe this was the year. Their faith was tested. The Cleveland Indians are a great and gutsy ball club. They took an early and commanding control of the Series, leading the Cubs three games to one in the best of seven. Then the magic started. With their backs to the wall, one defeat away from elimination, the Cubs roared back to win the final three games of the Series and brought the World Series trophy home to Chicago. They clinched the World Series in game 7 with an 8-to-7 win in extra innings. The game was tied 6 to 6 after nine innings. The suspense was heightened by a rain delay that was called just as the 10th inning was about to start. The rain stopped the game for 17 minutes. The Cubs scored 2 runs when they came back in the top of the 10th inning on a double by Ben Zobrist and a single by Miguel Montero. The Indians scored a run in the bottom of the 10th inning, but it wasn't enough. The final score: Cubs 8, Indians 7. Ben Zobrist was named World Series MVP. It was only the sixth time in World Series history that a team had come back from a deficit of three games to win a championship. The last team to pull it off was the Kansas City Royals in 1985. This World Series victory was truly a team victory. Every member of the team and organization deserves credit. Cubs General Manager Theo Epstein, destined for the National Baseball Hall of Fame, arrived in Chicago in 2011 with the challenge of rebuilding an organization that had tried everything to no avail. It took him five seasons, three managers, and dozens of trades, but he won. After game 7, he said he was just proud to bring the World Series trophy back to Chicago for Cubs legends Billy Williams and the late Ernie Banks and Ron Santo and for the generations of fans who never stopped hoping. What can we say about Cubs Manager Joe Maddon? He urged his players in spring training to ``Embrace the Target.'' When the chips were down, he had never doubted the Cubs were the finest team. While some may view his style as unorthodox, his confidence in his players carried over onto the field. The Cubs never panicked. They got their job done. Maddon spent decades in Major League Baseball before coming to the Cubs. With this Word Series trophy, he joins a small list of managers to win pennants in the American and National Leagues. He earned the 2015 National League Manager of the Year, and I am betting he is going to claim the title again this year. I congratulate the players--the World Series champion Cubs. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the names of the players.

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I am going to wrap up. I see the majority leader is on the floor, but I know he is a big sports fan. Catcher David Ross, playing in the final game of his career, made history when he hit a home run in the fifth inning of game 7 to give the Chicago Cubs a 6-to-3 lead. At 39 years of age, almost 40--a senior by baseball standards--Ross became the oldest player ever to hit a home run in World Series game 7. Kyle Schwarber--what a comeback--tore his ACL in the third game of the season and worked his whole season in physical rehab to try to come back. He made it just in time to play in the World Series. He ignited the Cubs' 10th inning rally in game 7 with a lead-off single and finished the Series with a .412 average and two RBIs. And then there is Ben Zobrist, the pride of Eureka, IL, and the MVP of 2016. I want to also congratulate the Cleveland Indians' manager Terry Francona and their entire organization and one of their best and most loyal fans, Senator Sherrod Brown. As Terry Francona said after game 7, they tried until there was nothing left. The epicenter of Cubs Nation is on the North Side of Chicago, but it is much bigger. It reaches across America. The Cubs Nation has fans in every city. Probably the most amazing parade I have ever attended--and I have been to hundreds--was the Cubs' victory parade. They estimated the crowd at 5 million. I tell you what, I think they are right. The population of the city of Chicago is 2\1/2\ million, just to give an idea of how many they drew. I will close with a short story. Although that 108 years between World Series victories brought much heartache to the Cubs Nation, there was joy after the drought. Quite a bit of that joy was listening to the legendary broadcaster who preceded Harry Caray as the voice of the Cubs. His name was Jack Brickhouse--or just ``Brick'' to his friends. He was born in Peoria and he was the first voice of the Cubs. He was the play-by-play announcer from 1948 until 1981. He called games for the White Sox, the Bears, and the Bulls. No wonder he is in both the Baseball and the Broadcasters Hall of Fame. On May 12, 1970, he was in the broadcaster's booth when ``Mr. Cub,'' the great Ernie Banks, reached a milestone few players ever achieve. Pat Jarvis was pitching for the Braves, and this is how Brickhouse called the play: Jarvis fires away. That's a fly ball, deep to left, back . . . Hey! Hey! Ernie Banks got number 500! Everybody on your feet. This . . . is . . . it! And then Jack Brickhouse added his signature refrain: ``Wheeeeee!'' When the Cubs won this World Series, I suspect that up in Heaven Brickhouse, Caray, Banks, Santo, and countless other Cubs' players joined those fans who had been waiting for that World Series for 108 years. At long last, the Cubs are baseball's real champions. I yield the floor.

Mr. DURBIN. That is how I remember it, yes. I don't know if you read the epilogue, but one of those 108-year-old women passed away within a few days of the Cubs' win of the World Series.

Mr. DURBIN. Died with a smile.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Kaine) and the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) are necessarily absent. I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Kaine) would vote yea.

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Virginia (Mr, Kaine) and the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) are necessarily absent. I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Kaine) would vote ``yea''.

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Kaine) and the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) are necessarily absent. I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Kaine) would vote yea.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to introduce the Solitary Confinement Reform Act, a bill that would make significant reforms to the use of solitary confinement in federal prisons and encourage states to implement similar reforms. Before I discuss what this legislation would do, let me explain why I am introducing it. Several years ago, I read an article in the New Yorker magazine entitled ``Hellhole.'' This article was written by Dr. Atul Gawande, a medical doctor who examined the human impact of long-term solitary confinement in American prisons. In this article, Dr. Gawande asked: If prolonged isolation is--as research and experience have confirmed for decades--so objectively horrifying, so intrinsically cruel, how did we end up with a prison system that may subject more of our own citizens to it than any other country in history has? At the time, I was serving as Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Human Rights, and I decided to hold a hearing on solitary confinement--the first-ever congressional hearing on the topic. It turned out to be a hearing that I will never forget. One of our witnesses at the hearing was Anthony Graves. I will never forget Mr. Graves' testimony. He spent 18 years in prison, including 16 years in solitary confinement. In 2010, he became the 12th death row inmate to be exonerated in Texas. Think about that--Mr. Graves spent 16 years in solitary for a crime he didn't commit. At the hearing, Mr. Graves testified about his experience, and here is what he said: I lived under some of the worst conditions imaginable with the filth, the food, the total disrespect of human dignity. I lived under the rules of a system that is literally driving men out of their minds. He went on to say: Solitary confinement does one thing, it breaks a man's will to live and he ends up deteriorating. He's never the same person again. . . . I have been free for almost two years and I still cry at night, because no one out here can relate to what I have gone through. I battle with feelings of loneliness. I've tried therapy but it didn't work. The therapist was crying more than me. She couldn't believe that our system was putting men through this sort of inhumane treatment. I think that sentiment echoed through the minds of everyone in the hearing room as Mr. Graves gave his testimony. We couldn't believe that our system was putting inmates through this sort of inhumane treatment. Mr. Graves' story shed light on the damaging impact of holding tens of thousands of men, women, and children in small windowless cells 23 hours a day--for weeks, months, years--with very little, if any, contact with the outside world. Clearly, such extreme isolation can have serious psychological effects on inmates. At the hearing, we also examined the serious fiscal impact of solitary confinement. We learned that in a federal high security facility, the cost of housing an inmate in segregation is about 1.3 times the cost of housing an inmate in a general population unit. At the Federal supermax prison in Florence, CO, the cost of housing an inmate in segregation is more than 2.5 times the cost of housing an inmate in the general population. Is this a wise use of taxpayer dollars when the money we spend on our Federal prisons already consumes one quarter of the Department of Justice's budget every year? So every dollar that we spend holding a prisoner in solitary confinement is a dollar that we don't spend on community policing, crime prevention, and drug treatment. We also discussed the significant public safety consequences of widespread solitary confinement. Some people might ask, ``What happens in our prisons doesn't affect me, so why should I care?'' But consider this--the vast majority of inmates held in segregation will be released into our communities someday. So if solitary confinement destabilizes prisoners and makes them more likely to engage in violence or other criminal conduct, then that affects all of us. Two years after my first hearing, I held a follow-up hearing. At that hearing, we heard from Damon Thibodeaux, who spent 15 years in solitary confinement at the Louisiana State Penitentiary before he was exonerated in 2012. Mr. Thibodeaux testified: I do not condone what those who have killed and committed other serious offenses have done. But I also don't condone what we do to them, when we put them in solitary for years on end and treat them as sub-human. We are better than that. As a civilized society, we should be better than that. Mr. Thibodeaux was right. We should be better than that. Thankfully, our society is beginning to recognize that the widespread use of solitary confinement in our prison system must change. In 2014, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy testified to Congress that, quote, ``solitary confinement literally drives men mad.'' Last year, Justice Kennedy again brought up the issue in a powerful concurring opinion. He wrote, quote, ``research still confirms what this Court suggested over a century ago: Years on end of near-total isolation exacts a terrible price.'' He went on to note that, quote, ``the judiciary may be required . . . to determine whether workable alternative systems for long-term confinement exist, and, if so, whether a correctional system should be required to adopt them.'' Pope Francis has also criticized solitary confinement. In a 2014 speech at the Vatican, he referred to the practice of extreme isolation as ``torture'' and ``a genuine surplus of pain added to the actual suffering of imprisonment.'' He went on to say: The lack of sensory stimuli, the total impossibility of communication and the lack of contact with other human beings induce mental and physical suffering such as paranoia, anxiety, depression, weight loss, and significantly increase the suicidal tendency. I still don't fully understand how our society reached a point at which the overuse of solitary confinement became acceptable, or normal. But I know that we need to do something about it. In light of the mounting evidence of the harmful, even dangerous, impacts of solitary confinement, states around the country have led the way in reassessing the practice. Take Colorado, for example, which has implemented a number of critical reforms. Colorado no longer releases offenders directly from solitary to the community and no longer places inmates with serious mental illness in solitary. Have these reforms made Colorado's prisons less safe? No, in fact since Colorado changed its solitary confinement practices, inmate-on-staff assaults are at their lowest levels since 2006, incidents of self-harm have decreased, and most inmates released from solitary are not returning. Progress has been made at the Federal level as well. After my 2014 hearing I called for an end to solitary confinement for juveniles, pregnant women, and inmates with serious mental illness in our federal prisons. I also asked the Federal Bureau of Prisons to submit for the first time to an outside independent assessment of its solitary confinement practices. The assessment, released last year, noted that some improvements have been made since the hearing, most importantly in the declining number of inmates in solitary confinement. The assessment also made a number of recommendations for additional reforms, such as improving mental health care for inmates in segregation and establishing alternatives to segregation for inmates in protective custody. BOP began taking steps to address these issues following the release of the assessment. Last year, building upon this independent assessment, the Department of Justice undertook a review of the Bureau of Prisons' use of solitary confinement. This January, President Obama announced that he had accepted a number of DOJ's recommendations to reform and reduce the practice of solitary confinement in the Federal prison system-- including implementing the ban on juvenile solitary confinement that I called for in 2014. I welcome the reforms that the President announced, and I am glad to see that the Bureau of Prisons is making some progress in implementing these reforms. However, our Federal prison system is still housing more than 10,000 inmates in segregation as I speak. The number of inmates in solitary confinement since my first hearing has decreased from about 13,600 to about 10,400. But the number of total Federal prisoners has also dropped significantly since 2012. So the percentage of Federal prisoners in solitary has only gone down from 7.8 percent to 6.7 percent. Clearly, there is much more work to be done. That is why Senator Coons and I are joining together to introduce the Solitary Confinement Reform Act. This legislation will build on the Justice Department's recommendations to further reform and reduce the use of solitary confinement in Federal prisons. Our bill ensures that inmates are only placed in solitary confinement when absolutely necessary--such as to control a substantial and immediate threat to the safety of other inmates or corrections staff, or to punish an inmate for a significant and serious disciplinary violation. Our bill also improves the conditions of confinement for prisoners in solitary and establishes firm time limits on segregation, in order to combat long-term isolation. However, we recognize that some extremely dangerous inmates require long-term separation from the general population. That's why our bill ensures that BOP can continue to separate those inmates who pose the greatest risk to other inmates, staff, and the general public. Among the most important provisions in our bill are the strict limits on the use of solitary confinement for inmates nearing their release date, inmates in protective custody, LGBT inmates, and inmates who are minors, have a serious mental illness, have an intellectual or physical disability, or are pregnant or in the first eight weeks of postpartum recovery after birth. For inmates who are placed in segregated housing, our bill improves access to mental health care and ensures that a robust review process is in place. Additionally, our bill increases transparency and accountability by requiring the Attorney General to establish a Civil Rights Ombudsman within the Bureau of Prisons to review inmate complaints, and directing BOP to submit an annual assessment to Congress detailing their solitary confinement policies, regulations, and data. Finally, our bill establishes a National Resource Center on Solitary Confinement Reform that would provide vital resources to state and local jurisdictions as corrections systems around the country pursue reductions in solitary confinement. I want to thank Senator Coons for working with me on this legislation, and Senators Booker, Leahy, and Franken for joining as original cosponsors of the bill. I also want to thank the ACLU, The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, Human Rights Watch, Just Detention International, Campaign for Youth Justice, Center for Children's Law and Policy, Human Rights Campaign, National Alliance on Mental Illness, National Religious Campaign Against Torture, Bend the Arc Jewish Action, Interfaith Action for Human Rights, T'ruah: The Rabbinic Call for Human Rights, and Washington Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs for endorsing the Solitary Confinement Reform Act. This legislation is one of many steps we should take to reform our criminal justice system and make our country safer, more just, and more fiscally responsible. I urge my colleagues to support the Solitary Confinement Reform Act. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Kaine) and the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) are necessarily absent. I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Kaine) would vote yea.