Lindsey Graham

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Because we are too worried about us and not them.

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I ask Senator Specter, may I be recognized?

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Madam President, my colleagues have been very kind to me in passing on their condolences from the people of their States regarding Charleston. I publicly acknowledge all the kindness they have shown to me and Senator DeMint regarding the loss of the firefighters in South Carolina. It was a huge blow to the community of Charleston. Nine very brave souls lost their lives trying to protect their fellow citizens. Senator Kennedy spoke very eloquently of the life of a firefighter. Senator Dodd and so many people have offered their condolences. There will be a memorial service tomorrow in Charleston. I will be going with other members of the delegation, and we will have a resolution before the Senate tomorrow honoring these heroes. I learned, talking with Senators Kennedy and Kerry, that there were six or seven firefighters lost in Worcester, MA, not that long ago. I have been told the Charleston fire was the largest loss of life among firefighters since 9/11. Those who have been to Charleston, SC, know what a wonderful, beautiful community it is. It is one of the most open, welcoming communities in the country. To the families, we grieve with you. We can only imagine the pain you are going through. I hope you do realize you have so many people in your corner saying prayers for your well-being and deeply appreciative of the sacrifice your loved ones made. It is human nature for most people to run away from fires. Only firemen run into them. Thank God people are willing to do that, go off and serve in the military, be policemen, EMTs, many of the other jobs that require self-preservation to take a backseat to the common good. Self-preservation is a strong instinct. I know parents would do anything for their children, and that is a very understandable emotion, taking care of your loved ones and your family. That probably trumps self-preservation--most of the time, anyway. Doing it for somebody you don't know makes you a hero. When you are willing to give your life, risk your life for someone you don't know, that is where the term ``hero'' applies. To the families who have lost loved ones, I do hope you have some comfort knowing that what your loved one was doing was so important. In this case, there was a belief that a civilian was left in the warehouse unaccounted for, so the firemen went back in to look for this person. Unfortunately, the worst happened. The building collapsed on them, and there was a tremendous tragedy. There are so many ways to thank firemen, and I am very inadequate in that regard. Similar to most young kids, I thought being a fireman was about the top of the pyramid. It seemed like the neatest job in the world. But as you get older, you realize how dangerous it is. It is one of those occupations, such as being a policeman or other occupations--but particularly firemen--that every day is a real risk you take. To the people of Charleston, SC: I know you are banded together. I know you are mourning together. You have the wishes of this body. All the Senators--Republicans and Democrats--very much have you in their prayers. To the families: Tomorrow will be a difficult day. It will be a very touching day. It will be a day of remembrance and mourning. It will also be a day of celebration, celebrating the lives of those brave firefighters who represent the best of my State and the best of humanity. I would like to end this statement with the understanding that there is nothing we can do to replace your loss. But we can and we will be there by your side as you move forward. God bless. I yield back the remainder of my time. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. GRAHAM. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. GRAHAM. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 5 minutes.

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, on June 18, 2007, in the face of blazing fire, sacrifice and duty overcame fear and surrender. With great sadness and the utmost respect, Senator DeMint and I mourn the tremendous loss of nine of our finest firefighters, as well as the immeasurable loss experienced by their families and loved ones. As the flames engulfed the building, the brave men and women of the Charleston County Fire Department rushed into the collapsing building as others were running out, fleeing for their lives. May this extraordinary courage and sacrifice forever reflect the spirit of South Carolina, as well as that of our great Nation. We extend our sincerest condolences to their families, their colleagues, and their friends. You give your loved ones to us to serve and protect our communities, putting public service above personal comfort. Our gratitude is boundless and our respect infinitely deep. We grieve beside you, and we take pride in and are humbled by this ultimate display of service and valor. In the midst of grief and devastation, may you find comfort in knowing that the memory of your loved ones will be forever etched in the minds of South Carolinians as the true embodiment of an American hero. The United States has not experienced such a devastating loss of firefighters since the horrific events on September 11, 2001. May the Charleston County Fire Department, led by Chief Rusty Thomas, as well as emergency personnel around the country, forever fill this massive void with the legacy left behind by these brave fallen firefighters. Let their legacy not be engulfed by flames and reduced to rubble but rather let it embolden and encourage others to serve in their honor and continue their mission to public service. There is no higher call than to serve, and to the fallen, their families, and those that will fill their shoes, we are forever indebted to you for your noble sacrifices.

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I think it is very appropriate you be occupying the Chair during this moment in this debate. My good friend from Illinois says to those who have worked so hard to get this bill to the point it is at: Nothing personal, but I can't live with this provision. Bipartisanship is music to the American people's ears. When you are out there on the campaign trail, you are trying to bring us all together. You are trying to make America better. Why can't we work together? This is why we can't work together because some people, when it comes to the tough decisions, back away because when you talk about bipartisanship, some Americans on the left and the right consider it heresy, and we are giving in if we adopt this amendment. The 12 million who have lived in fear for decades, my Republican colleagues and a majority have told our base we are not going to put them in jail and we are not going to deport them. No matter how much you scream, no matter how much you yell, we are going to make them right with the law, we are going to punish them, but we are not going to play like they don't exist, and we are going to do things differently in the future. If you care about families under this bill, people are united in 8 years who would be 30 years getting here. If you care about families wanting to wake up one morning and not be afraid, this bill does it. This amendment in the name of making the bill better says that bipartisanship doesn't have the ``bi'' in it. It means everybody over here who has walked the plank and told our base you are wrong, you are going to destroy this deal. And that is exactly what it is, a deal--a deal to make America more secure, to give people a chance to start their lives over again and to have a new system that has a strong family component but will make us competitive with the world because some people don't want to say to the loud folks: No, you can't have your way all the time. Let me tell you, this is about as bipartisan as you will get, Mr. President. Some of us on the Republican side have been beat up and some on the Democratic side have been beat up because we have tried to find a way forward on a problem nobody else wants to deal with. To my friend, Senator Kennedy, thank you for trying to find a way, as much as we are different, to make this country better, more secure, to treat 12 million people in a way they have never been treated and, in my opinion, deserve to be treated, to have a chance to start over. What a sweet idea it is to have a second chance in life. Well, they are not going to get it if this is adopted, and America will be all the worse for it. What a great opportunity we have as a country not to repeat the mistakes of 1986, by having a merit-based immigration system that has a strong family component but frees up some green cards so we can be competitive. So when you are out on the campaign trail, my friend, telling about why can't we come together, this is why. Mr. OBAMA addressed the Chair.

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I say to my colleagues who worked to put this bill together, they know what this does. The deal is that in 8 years people will be reunited as families who never would have seen each other for maybe 30 years. We have united families in 8 years. The Z visa people have a chance to start over, but only after the backlog is cleared. The merit-based system is the vehicle to be used after 8 years so they can come into our system and maybe one day be a citizen and get a green card. If we sunset the merit-based system at 5 years, there is no vehicle left, and to us over here, what would my colleagues say if we sunsetted the Z program in 5 years? My colleagues would walk, and they should. This is not right. This does not help us as a country. This destroys the vehicle to solve a problem that has been neglected for 20-something years. I ask my colleagues to vote no for the sake of the country.

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Will the Senator yield?

Mr. GRAHAM. For those who are worried about this, on the issue of families, you should be worried about this. Is it not true that in this bill, in terms of family reunification, the way we have accomplished or dealt with the bill, families will be reunified decades earlier, and those who are waiting to join their families under this bill--those who have done it right--will be together no later than 8 years; is that correct?

Mr. GRAHAM. So if you want to be the person who keeps families apart, bring this bill down. I assure families will not be reunified under the current system like they are here, that we will have a dramatic increase in green cards to get these families reunited. We go up to 74 percent. If you want to keep families apart, bring this bill down and let the current system survive. Secondly, when it comes to families, there are 12 million people here illegally. Is it not true that their families, under this bill--if they will do the right thing--will never live in fear again?

Mr. GRAHAM. To my good friend from Arizona, I say this: If you are concerned about the 12 million people who are living in fear, subject to exploitation, then this is the best chance you will ever have in my political lifetime to fix it. If you want to bring this bill down, the one thing I can assure you is that the 12 million, or however many there may be, will not only live in fear, they are going to live in more fear because we have stirred up a hornets nest in this country. I argue, if you care about people who have families not being afraid anymore, if they get themselves right with the law, help us pass this bill. In the future, after everybody has been accommodated who has a reasonable expectation, we are going to allow families to be part of the new immigration system. Could the Senator tell me again, in the future, what percentage of visas will be given to families?

Mr. GRAHAM. Would the Senator acknowledge that is twice the family component of other nations with whom we are competing?

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, the bottom line, I say to my good friend from Arizona, is we would have no bill without him. He stepped to the plate and said I am willing to look at the 12 million anew; I don't believe we are going to deport them, and I don't believe we are going to put them in jail; So I am going to give them a chance to identify themselves, come out of the shadows and do things that will make them valuable to our country and will be fair and humane. We have accomplished that. We couldn't do it last year. We are going to reunite families who have been waiting for decades to get into this country. We are going to expedite family reunions in an 8-year period for some people because they would not live long enough to get back with their families. In the future, we are going to have a new system. There is going to be a strong family component, but I make no apologies about this, in the future we are going to have immigration based on the global economy and merit. We need to start looking at where we are in the world and making sure people come into our country under a merit-based system. Neither one of my parents graduated high school. There is a way forward for the semiskilled and low-skilled workers to come into our country in the future. But the family component in the future will be spouses and minor children, freeing up thousands of green cards for merit-based employment. They are not going to bring in their adult children unless they have a way to get in on their own. They are not going to bring in their third cousin. Nobody else does that. They are going to come in as a nuclear family, and we are going to do it based on merit, and merit is not a degree. Under this bill, if you come in with a strong back and a strong heart and a desire to get ahead, you get points for getting a GED, you get points for an apprenticeship, you get points for doing the things that make you a better person. So I reject completely the idea that the merit-based system excludes hard-working people. I end with this one thought. If we don't get it right now and correct the flaws in our system which led to the 12 million which will make us globally noncompetitive, then who will? When will they do it? There are a million reasons to say no to something this hard, there are 12 million reasons to say yes, and there are many reasons in the future to say yes because our country cannot survive with a broken immigration system that makes us noncompetitive. This is a national security issue. This is a global economic issue. Now is the time to understand we will never have a perfect bill but to do something that will be good for America. I thank my good friend, Jon Kyl, and Senator Kennedy for getting us this far.

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President. I am very pleased to help recognize Senator Ted Stevens as the longest-serving Republican in the history of the U.S. Senate. Senator Stevens has represented the Last Frontier for nearly 40 years, during which he has become one of the most respected lawmakers and gentlemen in Congress. For a large majority of his time in Congress, Senator Stevens served with my predecessor, the late Senator Strom Thurmond, the Senate's previous longest-serving Republican. Now that the record is broken, I am certain Senator Thurmond would be pleased to know his good friend, Ted Stevens, will carry on the great tradition of service to our Nation. I am honored to serve alongside Senator Stevens and congratulate him on this momentous occasion.

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, very briefly, to respond to my good friend from New Mexico about some of his concerns, this is not about me feeling good; this is about having the law work in a way that will deter people from crossing our borders illegally. I point to the Angel Resendez case, and if we had this law in effect where we had mandatory jail time for those who had committed offenses and caught on our soil. In a 10-year period he committed five crimes, got deported each time, and was able to come back and commit another crime. If this amendment had been in place, he would have been in jail for a longer period of time and maybe his murder victims would be alive today. This is a case not about me feeling good; it is about somebody with a great propensity to cross our border illegally and commit crimes and not being held accountable in a serious way. After the Booker case, the sentencing guidelines are advisory. If we want to send a message that we are flexible when it comes to immigration law violations, we are doing a great job of it. People must believe we are flexible, because they are coming across our borders in droves. Flexibility is being taken as indifference. What we need to do is to make it a crime that will sting people when they come across. The cost to this country of having laws that are ignored and are virtually a joke is huge. Look at where we are today with illegal immigration. Let's try something new. Let's try doing something that has worked over time: If you commit a crime, you do some time. With that, I yield the floor and ask for passage.

Mr. GRAHAM. I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside, and I call up amendment 1173.

Mr. GRAHAM. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, as we try to repair a broken immigration system and replace it with a new system that learns from the mistakes of the past, I believe it is time for this body and this country to get serious about enforcing border security violations. After 9/11, the immigration debate has taken on a different tone. After 9/11, it is no longer about economic and social problems associated with illegal immigration. It is about national security problems associated with illegal immigration. In the Fort Dix, NJ, case, there were allegations made that six people were conspiring to attack Fort Dix. Apparently, three of those people came in illegally as children or crossed the southern border, and three of the people charged with crimes overstayed their visas. So it is more than securing the border. That is a central concept to this bill. Democrats and Republicans are rallying around the idea that the current system is broken in many ways. The borders are not secure. When it comes time to verify employment, fraud is rampant. The way you get a job now is to produce a Social Security card. I could take a Social Security card out of my wallet and have it faked by midnight. We are talking about replacing that kind of fraudulent system with tamperproof identification, which would be a great change in terms of understanding who is here and why they are here and employing people on our terms, not theirs. In the future, after we begin to control our borders, Senator Isakson's amendment says you can't bring new people into the country in a permanent fashion until you meet border security triggers. The employment verification trigger is a great idea. Here is the question I have: After we do all this, after we spend all this money to secure our borders and replace fraudulent systems with tamperproof systems, what do we do to people who try to come across illegally in the future? What message do we send them and the world? Here is the message: If you come across our border illegally in the future, you violate our border security, you are going to jail. No more catch you and send you back. My amendment would require a mandatory 60- day jail sentence for the first illegal reentry, up to a year but mandatory 60 days. If you come back again illegally, no less than 2 years. So everyone needs to know that America is changing its immigration laws, and we are going to be serious about enforcing them. If you break our laws, you do so at your own peril, and you will lose your freedom. That will help us dramatically make sure we don't repeat the mistakes of the past. There is another group of people we need to deal with in terms of illegal reentry that is bone chilling. The amendment would create mandatory jail time for people who have been convicted of crimes in the United States, illegal immigrants who have committed violent offenses, nonviolent offenses, who have served jail time, that if you get deported--and you are required to be deported after you serve your sentence--and get caught coming back into this country, you are going to go to jail, not be deported again. Let me give an example. Angel Resendiz is known as the railroad killer. Let me tell you the story of this criminal. In August 1976, he came across the border illegally. In September 1979, he was sentenced to a 20-year prison term for auto theft and assault in Miami, FL. He was paroled within 6 years and released into Mexico as a result of deportation. Over the next 10 years, he was apprehended and tried in Texas for falsely claiming citizenship. He did an 18-month prison term. He was arrested for possessing a concealed weapon in 1988 in New Orleans and received another 18-month prison term. Every time he was sentenced, he was deported and came right back to commit another crime. He got 30 months for attempting to defraud Social Security in St. Louis. He pled guilty to burglary charges in New Mexico that gained him an 18-month prison term, and he was paroled in 1992. He was apprehended in the Santa Fe rail yard for trespassing and carrying a firearm in 1995. On June 2, 1999, he was apprehended by the Border Patrol for crossing illegally. Due to a computer glitch, they let him go. Every time he committed a crime and served a sentence, he was deported, only to come right back and commit another crime. Once we caught him, all we did was deport him. He wound up killing two people within 48 hours of being released by the Border Patrol. If this amendment had been in place for people such as this guy, once he was found back on our soil after he served his prison term for a violent crime, he would not have been deported. He would have gotten a 20-year jail sentence with a mandatory minimum of 5 years. So there are people who have been convicted of rape and murder within the United States who have illegally come across the border, committed a crime, served their time, been deported, who have come right back, committed another crime, and nothing happens. If this amendment becomes law, once you have been convicted of a violent crime and deported, if you are found in our country, whether you are committing a crime, that is a crime in and of itself, and you are going to go to jail for up to 20 years, with a minimum of 5 years. Now that, to me, is what has been missing when it comes to our legal system and illegal immigration. It is now time to tell the world--our own citizens and all those who wish to come here--there is a right way to do it and there is a wrong way to do it. If you do it the wrong way in the future, you are going to go to jail. We need to change the system that would allow nothing to happen to somebody who had been in our country illegally, who was convicted of rape or murder, who served their sentence and had been deported, who illegally comes back into our country. If they cross the border again, if they cross the border in the future, after committing a violent crime, they are going back to jail for serious jail time to protect us against them. Now, I hope every Member of the body will understand this will make our effort to reform illegal immigration meaningful. If America does not care about enforcing its laws in the future, those who want to violate it will not care either. So now is the time to start the clock over, learn from the mistakes of the past and make a national commitment to secure our borders and deal with those who violate our immigration law in the sternest fashion. Because this Nation is under siege. After 9/11, illegal immigration is not just about people coming here to work, it is about people coming here to commit crimes and do us harm. So I am very hopeful this amendment will become part of the bill, and we can say, after this bill passes, we have taken a new approach, a tough approach, a long overdue approach, that we do care about the laws on our books and we are going to enforce them, and if you violate the law in the future by illegally coming across our border, you are going to jail. Mr. President, I would like, if I could, at this time, to recognize my colleague from Georgia, Senator Chambliss.

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, very briefly, and I will move to have this amendment voted upon, if that is the correct order of business. To my very good friend Senator Kennedy, it is my understanding in terms of incarceration costs, the costs are paid by the Federal Government through the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program about 90 percent--90 cents on the dollar. So the Federal Government does help the local communities almost fully to deal with the expense of people who are caught violating or who are put in jail. In terms of leniency--is there any evidence our laws are too lenient--I would say there are about 12 million pieces of evidence that our laws are too lenient. How can you have 12 million people come across the border and the word not be out that there is not much of a downside to doing it? Now, if you get 12 million people violating the law, it must be common knowledge among that population and others there is not much going to happen to you. Well, that needs to stop. We need to give people who are here a chance to assimilate. Legal paths, we have more legal paths than we have ever had through this bill. The illegal part of it has to come to an end and will only come to an end if there is a downside to breaking our law, and this amendment is about mandatory jail time. I am not trying to make it easier on people; I am trying to make it harder on people who take the law into their own hands and violate our border security. That is why we have mandatory jail time. Prior misdemeanors, you are going to go to jail 1 year if we catch you here again. If you served jail time of 2\1/2\ years and we find you on our soil again after you have been deported, 2 years. If you got a sentence of 5 years and we find you on our soil again after you have been deported, 4 years in jail. If you are convicted of three or more felonies, 4 years in jail, if we find you here again. If you are convicted of a violent crime, no less than 5 years, and up to 20 years. It is time to get serious. This is a serious amendment for a serious problem. I know this is going to send the right message and that we need to be tough, not just in words but in deeds. I urge passage of the amendment.

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to add Senator McConnell as a cosponsor of the amendment.

Mr. GRAHAM. I urge passage of the amendment.

Mr. GRAHAM. That suggestion is well taken, yes.

Mr. GRAHAM. Madam President, there is no objection on our side to this amendment.

Mr. GRAHAM. Madam President, if I could request the indulgence of Senator Cornyn, on behalf of Senator Hutchison, I call up amendment No. 1168 and ask unanimous consent for its immediate consideration.