Good morning. Ince becoming chairman january, ive been trying to find a solution to the problem that we all acknowledge which is a border out of control, laws being abused, humanitarian crisis, a National Security crisis in the making, and in march, the Committee Held a hearing to learn the scope of the problem. , the numbere of families have doubled, the problem is beginning to be unmanageable, we are all concerned about the humanitarian conditions which is why we supported a 4 billion appropriation to provide better housing, but we have done nothing to stop the flow until today. A bill i introduced after the scope of the hearing that was based on the best advice i could get from those in charge, and the dhs director who testified in june said the bill we had before this committee would stop 70 to 90 of the flow. My colleagues on the other site said what about Central America. You are right, we need to invest in Central America, but there is not enough money to invest until we change the magnet. The problem is obvious, you come to america, you asked for the asylum, the hearing is two or three years away, people do not show up. You bring a small child, we can only hold them for 20 days, dirty percent of the families are fraudulent families. The cartels, smugglers, and human traffickers are str exploiting th are exploiting this making billions of dollars a month. If we do not do something to change our laws, it will never stop. This bill will change our laws and it will allow us to have asylum claims to be made in a refugee eight center. We are no longer going to take the asylum claims of the border because we just do not have the cabability. We have a 900,000 person backlog and when it comes to minor children, we are going to have more than 20 days, but it is just intractable impractical. We need to cut this flow off. We need to invest in Central America if we can, but somebody has to do something. I have delayed the markup. We will be doing a better job of fixing the problem. Im not blaming anybody. This has been hard. It has been hard since 2006. Know thats a big change in our law. The problem is big and we need to have big solutions. I know you worry about the floras decision. All i can say is that 20 days is not working. It is impractical. Borderlearned at the visit where that 200,000 people released because they did not have the capability of holding the families, so they release them. I dont want to separate families. Release families unless they win their day. Right now, we are in the worst of all worlds. Separatent want to the family, youve to let them all go because you dont have the capability to hold them. This is a method a disaster. It needs to change. I dont want the committee to become irrelevant i dont want this to go directly to the floor. I have tried the best i know how to find a breakthrough. Me i am not going to stop the process. It is now time for us to move forward and get this bill out of committee. I will talk to anyone who will fix the problem in a broader fashion. I have tried. Blame me. We are not going to stop. We are going to keep trying. It fixes the problem in terms of flow. I have always enjoyed working with you and we will keep trying. I have a motion, i move that we vote on the graham amendment, as amended, if amended and the final passage of s. 1494, if amended, beginning at 11 00 today, the clerk will call the roll. The clerk will call the role. Point of order, mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, point of order. Mr. Chairman, this is unprecedented. No it is not. Mr. Chairman, you are not going to respond to our request for a point of order clarification . No i am not. What rule are you pointing to that allows you to do this. No. No. Mr. Chairman, point of order. We will continue the roll call and i will be happy to take any questions you have. I decline to vote on the grounds that this is an illegitimate process. Go ahead. Excuse me, i am here. Please vote. [indiscernible] continue please. Motion is passed. Please, yes maam, please. Go ahead. Mr. Chairman, there is a point of order pending before the committee. I will leave it up to senator feinstein. Do you want me to address the point of order . Im wondering if i can make my Opening Statement that address the point of order. Partisan immigration legislation that has no chance of becoming law. Repeatedly, statements have been made that republicans who want a solution, not a political issue. What is happening today, i can tell you it would not produce a solution. Today on this agenda, the secure and protect act does not enjoy broad support and what is worse, it will increase problems at the border. I am so disappointed that republicans have chosen to break Committee Rules and senate rules in order to force the bill through the committee. I am so disappointed that the secure and protect act was relisted on the committees agenda last week for the first time. If there had been a quorum to conduct business, this is important. It would have been subject to being held over. However, there were insufficient senators to conduct business. For five minutes, there were eight senators present, seven republicans and one democrat. And that was after we waited for over 30 minutes. The quorum requirement in the judiciary Committee Rules stated nine members of the committee, including at least two members of the minority, should constitute a quorum for the purpose of transacting business. The text of this rule is clear. The committee cannot move forward, even for the purpose of holding over a matter until the next business meeting, unless at least nine members are present, with two of the nine representing the minority. This was not the case last week. There were not enough senators present to reach the committees quorum requirement and transact business. The executive summary from last weeks meeting clearly stated no action was taken. That is the official statement from last weeks meeting. As a result, today is the first time the committee may take any action on chairman grahams bill. The Committee Rules also state at the request of any member, or by action of the chairman, a bill, matter or nomination on the agenda of the committee may be held over until the next meeting of the committee or for one week, whichever occurs later. That is judiciary Committee Rules 1. 3. Democratic members requested we hold chairman grahams a bill over until the august recess as required as required by our rules. I urge the chairman to honor that request. It was not. Republicans today are pushing forward with consideration and votes on s. 1494. The committee will be breaking and violating its own rules. Why even have rules if they can be broken whenever it is expedient to do so, or whenever it suits the will of the majority or the chairman . Members on the others of the aisle often complain about senator reids decision to go nuclear and change the rules of the senate on judicial nominations. However, make no mistake, if republicans go forward with breaking the rules today, this will be a new precedent that will denigrate this committee and the institution of the senate. I strongly object to proceeding with Committee Business today. This will be the first time that our committee, and i have been on it for 26 years, will blatantly disregard quorum and holdover rules. It should also be noted by moving forward today, the majority will be breaking the rules of the senate. Senate rule26. 2 states each Committee Shall adopt rules, not inconsistent with the rules of the senate, governing the procedure of such committee. Any amendment to the rules of a Committee Shall not take effect until the amendment is published in the congressional record heard our Committee Rules do not have a mechanism for modifying or suspending the rules after they have been adopted and published at the beginning of the congress. Nor is there a provision for waiving either rule 1. 3, which grants each member the right to hold a matter over, or rule 3. 1, which establishes our core requirements. In my 26 years, i cannot remember a time when the chairman and Ranking Member did not come together to develop bipartisan rules for the committee that were adopted by unanimous consent. Chairman grassley and i did that last congress and chairman graham and i did that this congress. We are proceeding in this manner to force a vote on partisan immigration on a partisan immigration bill even though the chairman did not reach out to try to find a compromise or solution. In addition, as far as i know, there has been no attempt to publish this partisan change to judiciary rules in the congressional record. Mr. Chairman, we live in a democracy and our government is only as strong as those in it. Our rules are not enforced by police action. No one can be arrested on breaking the rules. They are based on respect. We are not the house. This is not a body intended to run on power alone. However, today, if republicans move forward in this manner, we will take one more step toward fundamentally altering the senate and turning this body into a second house of representatives. If the rules are disregarded, i strongly believe we diminish this institution and this committee. This is not the senate i joined in 1993, it is not the senate the framers envisioned in 1787. I also believe it is important to remember this committee and the senate has a tradition of considering significant immigration legislation in a bipartisan manner. In 2003, they came together and introduced a bipartisan comprehensive immigration bill, while the house considered a democratic only bill. In 2007, senators kennedy, durbin, myself, kyle, hatch, graham and others worked long hours to negotiate a bipartisan bill. We worked handinhand with the Bush Administration as the secretaries personally engaged in numbers of meetings. Most recently in 2013, the gang of 8 led us in negotiations for another attempt in bipartisan legislation. This bill ultimately passed the senate by a strong 6832 vote. Before i say that, according to the secretary, if the 2013 bill had passed, his comment is we would be a lot more secure along the border. Yet today, the bill on the agenda does not enjoy bipartisan support. No democrats were consulted. It will not be voted on by a committee with any democratic support. Moreover, if leader mcconnell were to choose to bring it to the senate floor, i do not believe it could secure 60 votes to open debate. If Mitch Mcconnell decided to break even more senate rules to force the bill out of the senate, the bill would die in the house. My staff confirmed with nancy pelosi, chairman nadler, this bill will not move through the house immigration subcommittee or the house Judiciary Committee. Nor will it come to a vote on the house floor or secure enough votes to be discharged. Let me say that again no matter how many Committee Rules or senate rules are broken, this bill will not become law. I deeply respect you, mr. Chairman, but given that this is a deadend proposition, it begs the question why are we doing this . Finally, i want to discuss the problems the graham intended to address and the policies it includes. We have discussed repeatedly the crisis at the border. To be clear, the crisis is there are unprecedented numbers of children and families coming to the United States seeking Legal Immigration through asylum. This crisis is not about ilLegal Immigration. It is not about record numbers of total people trying to enter the United States. I have this on my desk with a little heart over it. This is a father and a young child. This is them trying to cross the river. I will pass it around because to look at the child sends a loud and clear signal. We have discovered repeatedly the crisis at the border. To be clear, the crisis is there is an unprecedented number of children and families coming to the United States seeking Legal Immigration through asylum claims. The crisis is not about ilLegal Immigration. It is about record numbers of total people trying to enter our country. It is what is present on the statue of liberty, that is the watchword in the moniker of our nation. We have a new problem. Children and families are facing violence and persecution in their home countries. They are coming to the United States for refuge in record numbers, that is true. Unfortunately, the Trump Administration has exacerbated the problems by disrespecting the laws that ensure we treat vulnerable families and children with care and provide basic humanitarian conditions. In fact, in the last year, at least seven Migrant Children have died after being held in u. S. Custody. In addition in june of this year, the dhs Inspector General observed immediate risks and egregious violations of detention standards at facilities, including overly restrictive segregation, inadequate medical care, unreported security incidents and significant food and safety issues, including moldy bathrooms, unusable toilet and foulsmelling spoiled food. This is the dhs oig titled concerns about ice care at four detention facilities, june 3, 2019. The aclu filed another lawsuit because it discovered the administration has continued to separate children from their parents even though a federal judge ordered an end to the practice. The lawsuit alleges over 900 more children have been taken from their parents. With all this as a backdrop, how can we not the concerned . The bill does not fix these problems. It will only make them worse. For example, the bill would eliminate protections and limit how long children can be held in unlicensed the tension centers. Detention centers. The bill repeals the provisions that ensure government facilities maintain minimum standards, such as providing clean Drinking Water and safe and sanitary conditions. Moreover, the graham bill gives the department of Homeland Securitys Sole Authority to determine what the standards should be for Holding Children and makes this policy unreviewable by a court. I question whether a policy could withstand legal challenge. Even if those were to fail, the Inspector Generals report makes a clear case as to why this congress should not give dhs sole discretion to determine what constitutes sanitary and humane conditions for Holding Children. Second, the graham bill would repeal several important provisions that i authored to protect unaccompanied children, specifically under current law, unaccompanied children under 18 are required to be transferred from Homeland Security to a state licensed childcare service, managed by hhs within 72 hours. While in those shelters, hhs is tasked with identifying family members or sponsors who can care for the child while he or she goes through a nonadversarial asylum process. This law actually has worked well. Currently, over 95 of children are placed with their families or a sponsor within approximately 45 days. We should be proud of that. However, under the graham bill, dhs would be given the authority to conduct a new interview process, administered by an immigration officer from customs and border protection. Under the new process, the cbp officer would interview a child to determine if they qualify for asylum. The decision would be made under a new higher standard of review and would not be reviewable by ny court. Is the decision would be made higher standard of review and would not be reviewable by any court. And 13. Age 8, lines 12 in addition, the unaccompanied detained and nlikely to have access to counsel or an ability to gather to support their application. Finally, if its decided the eligible for asylum, they would be subject to deportation. These are significant changes, law. Rs, to current whats worse is the impact on no legal ho have representation and cannot be expected to understand complex law. Row review of the secretarys decision. Specifically, the bill states court shall have urisdiction to review a determination made by the secretary. Before. Ver heard that the bill would also change the the bility standards for special imgrant juvenile status visa to make it more difficult children to qualify for protection by requiring that the child demonstrate that both arents abuse them, not just one. This provision risks the return an abusive or neglectful parent in their country of origin. Existing law sought to prevent. And im winding up. I apologize. Longer than i thought. Finally, the grand bill would to restrict changes asylum law. From a ban anyone country that has a refugee or a country ter the practical effect would be to age prohibit individuals from most from l american countries asylum. G for limits asly lumbar applications by only allowing families who d enter the United States through the ports of entry to apply for asylum. What makes this policy change draconian is that currently the administration is men, and women, children who seek to legally pply for asylum from entering u. S. Ports so in effect this is further closing off legal for asylum. Pply if enacted, the grand bill would children and for families seeking asylum for our system of providing protection to the persecuted. Bad situation far worse. Of liberty could weep, she would. Mr. Chairman, e all agree something must be done but this is not it. Fore you for your bearance. The process. Out yes, sir. Absolutely. Quick. We introduced the bill in may. We have a hearing about will it not. Or they say it will. I was asked to see if we can compromise. A the bill was ready to be held ver and marked up for seven weeks ive been trying to find a solution. Durbin blaming senator or pelosi or anybody. Gone nowhere. So let me tell you about the committee. What you did to last week. To showk, you chose not up so that i thinked not proceed ive been ll that working on for two or three months. What am i supposed to do . Happen. Not going to the committee cant be a place where nothing happens because it. House may not pass we all agree on our side this will fix the problem. A right to vote. You dont want the committee to be ignored by the majority just of either party and take a bill out of our committee and bring it to the the floor ecause we cant do our business. I am not changing the rules. Im making a motion in response you did last week. Seven weeks ago, i could have arked this bill up and at the request, the members on your side, i held it to see if we could work it out. Went to the house knowing that the house has to be on board. Talked to a very reasonable person. Space over res no here to change the asylum laws go down the flores route. I said, i respect that but something has to give. What im doing today is using rule 26 for a majority of the to deal with situations like this. The rules are still the rules only work if we Work Together in a reasonable fashion. Im sure oad, and yall will be back in charge, if bill important to you, and you take seven weeks to a to work with us to find solution and we choose not to show up p so you cant proceed, do what xpect you to im doing. If you dont, the committee becomes irrelevant and i dont want it to become irrelevant. Of 8 bill of which i was a part wouldnt fix this problem. Crisis thats turning into a disaster and somebody the flow. Hut off this shuts off the flow. As to the substance, why are in such large numbers . Lets look at this. Be mindful. This father had to believe if i can just get one foot on im home free with my daughter. That if you him and your child make it to to stay. Youre going theyre actively marketing the coming to the United States in the middle east. 62 countries have sent people here. The are ads being run in middle east for 30,000. If you can get to guatemala and come and claim asylum, you bring a small child, youre here to stay. When it comes to unaccompanied minors, 98 are never sent back to their home country. Canada or mexico we can send you back but if youre from Central America we send their ple children on this dangerous journey. This father made a dash across on the other use side he saw a chance to stay in america. Immaterial other fathers to know is that theres a legal way to do this. And your child at risk. Let them make these claims in their country to have a time out border and when i go to the border, i dont see abuse by governor, i see our laws not, working and im not going to aid and abet the system any longer. Us not to change our laws, were aiding and abetting a very profitable business that puts this at risk so the next father that comes to the is you wonty hope try to cross the river to risk you and your childs life laws are changing and its no longer worth it and at any nobody is going to 8,000 to go to mexico. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Also note that the committee talking about five to show up failed oo but and in our business eetings when there was not a quorum, we never deemed a quorum over. O put things just a little bit of history. Ive served on this committee for over 40 years. Half of that time i was either chairman or Ranking Member. With some i can Say Authority the senate Judiciary Committee is not what it used to be. Perfect. Er been weve had our fair share of disagreements. Considered n weve controversial legislation, weve passionate debate, this committee has always respected the minority. Whichever party was in the minority. That over the last 40 years, this committee has a rule when considering traditional nominees, it did three times. Ruled for tee protecting the rights of minorities to debate. Those violations were done by republican chairman terminate debate on controversial judicial nominees. Those three were serious mistakes. But this is a lot worse. This committee certainly in the 0 years ive been here has never sunk to a point where the jamming is so intent on a partisan bill through the ommittee theyre willing to disregard any and every rule even the painters notion of in the and do that process. Heres whats happening. F the majority is willing to break any rule in order to report this bill today, there no rules. If the majority can decide at the iven moment to ignore committees rules, process, and principles, then this committee s nothing but a conveyer belt under a partisan ideas the thumb and control of donald trump. Rules. A copy of the the reason i have a copy of the ules, every single republican voted for these rules. For single democrat voted these rules. And i hope you can remember six monthswas all of ago every single republican and democrat voted for these rules. Rules largely the same as when i first sat on this committee 40 years ago. Like to think they mean something and that we can rely on them. But even though every republican thesemocrat voted for it, rules are on the verge of becoming meaningless. Rules are no longer in effect. Same republicans who voted have em six months ago said to heck with them, tear them up. Thats what were doing. Them up. Why . Eager to discard our norms and principles. Apparently, the answer is for legislation at its core. It gives the president what he in his political war on immigration. The indefinite detaining of children. Ittisan and short sighted as gets. This is supposed to be the Judiciary Committee, not the donald trump committee. In this bill were doing this, were throwing out all the rules. Rules that republicans voted for. Well throw them all out. Thats never gooing to become law. Every one of us knows this bill will never become law. Will never become law because this is not how you get things here. Round here knows s been that. We did in nt is what 2013 and our chairman in this ommittee and our chairman was involved with that. Several others were here. Hearings. Ltiple we have five days of mark ups. Hours of debate. Bipartisan majority of senators supported the bill both here and committee. Now on the senate flair. Were in the majority forget and we 50 republican amendments. 50. Amendments were accepted. What a difference. If we replicated that same i think we could have a bill that could pass. Not every one of us agree on certain things. We need a safe and secure border. All agree theres humanitarian crises. Democr democrats as we did when i was chairman and we accepted 50 amendments. We passed it. We passed it. In the u. S. Y senate. It would have become law and wed be better off. The republican speaker at that time said he could not bring it up even though there are enough pass it in the house but it would have violated the hastert rule and so they that rule. Iolate did lets work the way we then. We have shown it can be done but partisan eed in this we say theen how can republicans are dealing in good faith . Theyre not. What good faith means. For anyone who may argue that theres justification eh quav this, theres not. Were seeing a calculated assault on senate prerogatives. Assault on the practices and now on the very rules of this committee. Never seen have before and either republican or democrat control. As chairman of this committee, i rule. Broke a committee it was frustrating sometimes. Us to followwanted the rule but i always followed it. Resolution and competing philosophies require rules. If we so casually disregard the rules that apply to our own proceedings, its the height of irony. How do we have judicial nominees before us and say are you law . G to follow the rule of respond. May quickly so heres the way youre be chairman. T after seven weeks of holding my this scenario, i cant even pass a bill that i as chairman because two of you wont show up. Be different if i had seven weeks i was i d marking up this bill and got nowhere. And im not going to get the current r construct until the political system responds differently to border. Oing on at the what youre telling me is that i to me ignore what you did last week. I will not. You as long as i can in good faith but youre job away to take my from me. I take this very personally. ve tried my best find a compromise last week so that i could proceed. Thats not going to happen as long as im chairman. Like what we do over here. You can vote no. Committee is not going to be the dead End Committee on things that matter. To act. Tually going i hope its bipartisan but if its not, were going to deal problems. Ations i told the Border Patrol agents im going to do what i can and any votes on get the democratic side in this committee well see if it gets on the floor and maybe it wont and ill keep talking to you to try to find a way to gap. E the but senator lehy youve been here a long time. Have done this to you. If you tried to work with me for weeks on something important to you and me and my not show up so you could move forward, i dont have much choice. You either give up being do what im ou doing. Senator durbin. I would note for the record i wasnt here last week because a ember of my family was being buried that kay. Duly noted and i apologize ut five republicans werent here. I hope they were not at a family funeral too. I dont mean to make it personal but i was told nobody come for the mark itthat i could not up. I was informed that nobody was oing to show up and it was not because of scheduling problems. In defense of your loss and you here, i am sorry. Mr. Chairman, although some allies find itnd hard [indiscernible audio]. Mr. Chairman, we find it hard to understand you and i have had more constructive conversations than the opposite. Yes. I believe weve achieved some good things in our time working together. In the future. N while i appealed to you earlier to make another effort asked if we could have you postpone the mark up on this and you asked if senator schumer could reach out to the on this matter. We both went to senator schumer. The acting ut to secretary that same day and he reached out to the white house. It was a good faith effort to comply with your request and askedas the reason why we you to at least delay the mark last week. Someone who would finally be sit with the likes of and work on dy hese difficult, challenging issues for our country. Ive always viewed my articipation one of the highlights in my senate career. It is difficult to move things in this committee if theyre partisan. The rules are written and accepted by democrats and the committee that we have to go beyond this things and tryan to work things out between us. Lahy did that. Ed now today we face the reality that these rules for the First Time Since ive served n this committee in over 20 years are going to be cast aside on this legislative matter. Go through you dont with this. Ill tell you why. Be an lieve that you can outstanding chairman of this committee, that you can lead us hrough some very difficult times because ive seen you work n a bipartisan basis but this is not a bipartisan approach. It is not the best of the not you at d its our best and i know you well enough to say that were faced with the following problem. That e rules written respect the minority in the committee. Chance now that a was not present. Having acknowledged that, no business took place so today as gather in a bipartisan of the under the rules senate under the judiciary rules, we know 1. 3 gives us if opportunity to hold calendar ter for one week. One legislatedive week. Others course i and would request. We know further that under rule we entertainittee, amendments just as with senator sessions and many of us have to offer as soon as this matter comes up. I think thats a good faith effort to respect the rules and the minority, of something which today you may not need adds much as you might future. The i would make a point of order rules which allow a matter to be held over for a egislative week and to allow members to offer committees the of the by the chair committee and we have been ghiven opportunity to hold this over and when we return in eptember to go through the orderly amendment process. Perhaps in the meantime, well resolve her way to this. All due respect, we didnt break the rules. A majority of the committee on any given moment to decide how to dispose of business. We did that. Ma joshty of this Committee Said they wanted to move forward. Ive been wanting to move forward for seven weeks and move forward. Were not going to go into the august break without having taken some action on this bill. Hope i made that clear a long time ago. This is a crisis. Going to solve itself by sitting around looking at each other and doing nothing for months. So the committee invoked rule 26, a we want to us said vote on this bill. And were going to vote on this bill. Its okay to differ. Of votes in this committee are along party lines. Thats okay. Thats why we have two different parties. Thats why why we have the senate. Going to do is shut ourselves out and become irrelevant. Ere not going to give up the committee to the floor. Mr. Chairman, before you move chairman, i would like to acknowledge rule 26 requires ou to publish your proposed rule change in the congressional record a rules change. Its a motion. Its a motion. Role call. Led to a glad to. This is a motion on the rules change. Ruling of the chair and ask members on our side to call the role. Roll call] thank you, mr. Chairman. Een a lot of talk about the procedural issues. F this legislation and on some of the criticisms that have been made earlier today and in recent months about the merits of that legislation. At the heart are of what many republicans have been calling for and for reasons that escape and atowned and reforms that hese republicans are seeking, those with things like the flores agreement, reforms to the asylum eforms to our laws themselves and the standard seas that have been abused by in order to engage in human trafficking. Reforms would somehow undermine humanitarian and forons for children other vulnerable migrants. Not only is this not true, but is the opposite of true. T gets the formula exactly backwards. You see, far from protecting hildren and other vulnerable migrants, the flores agreement, he tvpra and our asylum laws the way theyre set up without these reforms exacerbate the they incentivize further human degradations. The very types of degradations we all respond to with certain degrees of shock and horror. For example, it is precisely sittalment lores that were required to release Child Migrants after 20 days and cant place most Migrant Children in expedited removal. Rules in tandem guarantee brought to nor is to his or her benefit. The quences of this reseem phases of these children are horrible. They suffer is grotesque in many cases we know theyre sold sex slavery. In countless cases, we know that theyre being traded, bought sold, even rented. Many examples just in recent weeks and months f a 51yearold man arriving with an infant child comblaming that child to be his own only to discover after the fact that the his own and he ended up admitting that he rented this child in order to border illegally which he had done several years earlier. Smuggling routes are well worn. Theyre well known. But most importantly theyre own on the backs of our laws. Aws that are crying out [roll call] i would ask consent that my statement be made part of the record. Objection. I am sick at heart at what weve done. Hate being here right now and here. As just happened i think that in the chairmans 26 is you think youre going to get a lot of on the floor for this bill . You think that the house is ever going to take this up . So whats the point . If there e one thing were a broken committee on this subject. Me stands asext to a living testament of how much are willing to bill. To get a bipartisan you is lived this experience. A very wise person once said i how in the world we ile immigration without bipartisanship. When it comes to the bing things were all in it together. Democrats. And i embrace problem solving. I realize democrats have to get negotiation. The are. Willing to give if they i would like to see that guy like i would like to see donald trump in 2009 on climate change. Also said this wise person who i like what ive seen in the last couple of years here bothers me. E really e have to find a truce here to reset. This is not a truce. Its an campuser bags of hostilities breaking multiple rules of the committee and breaking a rule of the get there. Even the most partisan person in senate, the leader said i think its long past due for us o sit down and try to fix as much of this problem as we can. Not advance that cause. Today set that cause back and i day today will be a dark in the history of this committee. Mr. Chairman. Responding. I was told that senator schumer passed on to the dhs director he would talk to the president if we wouldnt mark up this bill. To nt know what thats got do with anything other than i wish they would get in a room. I would be glad to help them but o senator wide house im not just Lindsey Graham anymore. Im the chairman of the committee. Everyone over here believes this problem. The the people at dhs and the Border Patrol say it will fix the more m thereto are problems that this wont fix but trying and weeks of going nowhere, i guess what is i cant move this bill at all. Ever. Agree to show up. The rules are there to be sure and work with each other. Ive done a lot of talking and would recollecting. To makes are not set up sure i cant do my job or you cant do yours. Thats the way theyre being used here. I might as well not be chairman because for seven weeks aye you wanted me t do. This problem only gets worse. This is different Immigration Reform. So from my point of view i think know to do as chairman as Lindsey Graham and with you nue to work but we cant have this committee irrelevant. The chairman has suggested the denying the mar joy quorum assuming thats what we did thats what i was told. I would like to ask that your Ranking Members by the tail youre to produce a quorum. My time on ion in committee it is a standard operating procedure. Suddenly decide that, that is an unforgivable novelty so a bizarre and i think were just if i could thank you. Right. re sometimes its hard to get a busy. Because people are those seven plus trying to find a resolution and there was none. Up so i ot showing could not proceed to the mark up. Delayed for eight weeks. I dont know what to do other give up my right as chairman to move my own bill. And i choose not to do that. Thank you, mr. Chairman. And my sentiments are reflected the words of senator durbin and senator white house. Members that you and senator kennedy and mccain nvited to join the group when we were brand new senators to work on the immigration renorm ill when president bush was president and i remember those times when we were unsuccessful pushback if you remember which was so sad. It was a moment in time we could have gotten it done and i dont we are would be where today. That was part of the work you did. When ast forward to president obama is in and you stood up and worked with us on a bill. Bill but on that bill and you stood up when the dreamers, when we were trying to out that compromise. And my view is we have someone in the white house right now and not going to go on my views. Ive made them very clear. Been out there on rhetoric that has been so all acrossimmigrants this country. Not just people at the border or trying to seek asylum. I think there are some Common Sense Solutions here like trying to allow people to seek down in the northern countries like passing comprehensive Immigration Reform using some of that money 158 billion in deficit reduction. Then you could use some of that Border Security and asylum and those things. Theres a common sense solution i just beg of you that despite the rhetoric on all of his, it is just too important right now and there are too many lives at stake for us to mess around with this. I hope you would reconsider this and work with us going forward. Work with you and senator kunz is next. He Vice President mentioned last night 750 billion. That came through our committee. I was the chairman of the still am of the foreign ops. Appropriated 750 billion, excuse me, 750 million to help the triangle countries. I thought the Vice President had plan. D but weve got a unique situation people are using our laws against us. Advertising all over the world. Asylum. Bring a small child. You stay. Thats got to stop. I have to move this bill. Keep working with you but i have to move it, show people going to do something. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I am deeply disappointed and reached this ve point today. As some of you know this is not my first time working for this committee. Actually a summer law clerk for then chairman biden the early 1990s. And i remember watching the ways then andthis committee over the decades since and now as ive served on it has been a deeply divided bitter times where folks have been able to Work Together. For a reason. T e adopted them six months ago unanimously. They are difficult and force us to Work Together. Struck by why were here. Clearly this bill thats been committee andthis in inappropriate ways will not see the light of day. Will not see the president s desk. I am left asking why are we here. Why are we doing this today. Sadly just the latest step down a destructive escalation that weve found ourselves on by actions taken by both parties congresses. But i think as both of you held oscar martinezof ramirez and his daughter we have remind thatted theres a humanitarian dredge i did at our border and we should all be to Work Together to demonstrate that we support order security, support our customs and Border Patrol, and support a human system allowing asylum and allows for refugees and does not put kids longer periods as a path towards solving this. Dont see how todays actions will move us any further down the field. Filed in rocess we this committee was my proudest oment and experience in this senate and i quote you in saying mr. Chairman that you said on he floor after the final mark up, after the final vote that it was a day that made you proud to senate. N the my concern is that we did not take up or debate a number of raised by rder members of the minority. E did not take up and debate amendments. Its not for lack of ideas. We have amendments that could strengthen this bill and deal these issues. My core concern is that our counterparty with whom you are eagerly trying to egotiate who is utterly unreliable on this. Ill just mention a previous bipartisan negotiating effort where on a tuesday a a posal was accepted and on thursday rejected. Without being too pointed, we the floor to take four different votes on immigration policy and an bipartisan effort that i was blessed to take to the loor with our friend senator mccain got only 52 votes despite bipartisan cosponsors in the house. A responsible bill investing in security, strengthen immigration judges, deal with the northern triangle. A bill that should have passed. In a very difficult place. This committee should be the with respect we hammer out solutions and then help the house and help the branch find their way forward. Not the place where we further tear nto each other and each other apart. I hope that we will find our way back towards each other after this break but frankly after this breaking of the rules, i it will be harder not easier. I will commit to working with of this committee, mr. Chairman, who is willing to reach across the aisle and keep find solutions to what is a genuine crisis at our border. I believe you. Senator, should we take a break and vote . Ill come back and listen. To be very brief. Im short. Okay. Because i agree with the 125i789s made by my colleagues about the rules and i dont want them except to point out just to provide a beginning o the research that will be done hopefully by committee march, 2012 the business meeting, the committee did not meet. He quorum requirement because only one republican, senator grassly, was present. And the was taken aagain carcinoma was held over he following week when the committee had a quorum required the rules and the then chairman explained and he said epublicans boycotted the meeting but he noted that he had to forego the ns quorum requirement on days when the committee was meeting only matters over but republicans renewed. But he respected the rules. A historicalout as footnote. The main point we were together. 2013 i was proud to participate in the deliberations and the involved as very much in the group of us that produced hat bill overwhelmingly approved by the senate on a bipartisan basis. Has changed since then is the poisoning of the rhetoric. Blame no one on this committee or in this room. The president of the United States. Not the oneident is who has brought us to this point Committee Meeting but consequences. Had and i am hopeful that we will above that low point in our rhetoric and discussion but in the meantime, the damage this kind of action is essentially to raise expectations. Colleagues will go back and say theyve accomplished something through action. But in fact as the chairman has is an effort it that is doomed and so it is false promises that i regret most deeply. We can Work Together. Briefly. Just one quick comment and i go. W we got to the tuesday, thursday trump [indiscernible audio]. Its a problem. The president about asylum and flores. Schumer g that senator and President Trump can sit down out us and try to come money for Central America. Modifications of our laws but seen weeks ive been trying single handedly pretty much to something forward and the committee has to be relevant and not t want the committee to act on something that where all of us agree will fix the thelem and i think will fix problem and bipartisanship is going to be required eventually and maybe we can get there. Know that senator koonz and in of you have compromised the past. Mr. Chairman, the majority allowed this committee to 1. 3, rule are 1, 4, and rule 26. And since we were not able to offer amendments to this bill i out one of the many egregious provisions of this bill. A law that prohibits administrative decisions to be giving so a court much power to administrative Decision Making that in a word probably d unconstitution unconstitutional. You. Thank you. Ill go vote now and meeting is adjourned. Live, your calls and comments on washington journal. After that, an interview with President Trump. Cnn come apart to of the democratic president ial candidate debate. Country where there is no public city in which, no i can walk. In a woman to do anything her life, she needs a car. And to do this, she needs a man. Tonight on cspans q a, all daring toks about drive. Her decision to challenge the saudi government span on women drivers. Women are not supposed to drive. We show that we are able, we are capable of driving and being in the drivers seat of our own destiny by doing this act of civil disobedience. Watch tonight at 8 00 eastern on cspans q a. Morning, justin myers, ceo of the super pac, for our efforts tousses democrat a turnout. Later, american