Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.
[Pages S3275-S3276]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Border Security
Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, on Friday, the entire country got
some really good news: President Trump and his administration secured
an agreement with the Government of Mexico. Our neighbors to the south
will be doing more to secure their own borders and to control the flow
of people through Mexico. These stepped-up efforts should help relieve
some of the extraordinary pressure on the U.S.-Mexico border.
This was an important step in tackling the unacceptable and
unsustainable crisis--the crisis that continues to roil our southern
border. Mexico has an important role to play in solving the ongoing
security and humanitarian nightmare.
Americans were also happy to hear the President's announcement that,
as a result of this progress, our own families and businesses will not
need to absorb the cost of higher tariffs on imports from Mexico. This
would have been a step backward for the U.S. economy generally, a new
obstacle for many of our manufacturers and small businesses, and a pain
that families back home tell me often would hurt them directly.
At its best, the U.S.-Mexico friendship should combine strong mutual
efforts on security with a strong and prosperous trading relationship.
I am glad that is the direction we seem to be headed.
So this was an important step, but as my Republican colleagues and I
have been sounding the alarm for months, the magnitude of this border
crisis means that more will obviously be necessary.
Our U.S. processing facilities are badly strained beyond capacity as
record numbers of individuals and families continue to pour through.
The men and women of Customs and Border Protection and our other
agencies on the border are juggling too much, making do with too little
and having to triage resources away from other important priorities so
they can keep up even the most basic security functions and provide
even the bare minimum humanitarian assistance.
The administration is working overtime on this. Now our Mexican
friends are stepping up as well. In short, about the only important
players who are still refusing to take action are my
[[Page S3276]]
Democratic friends right here in Congress.
Democrats in the House and the Senate have had no shortage of
rhetoric on the subject. They are very focused on sounding concerned
about this but thus far have stood in the way of any action.
It is not rocket science. The agencies on the border that are
confronting this unprecedented crush of people need more resources.
They have explained that to Congress as clearly as possible.
There is nothing remotely partisan about this. A few weeks ago, even
the New York Times editorial board wrote:
As resources are strained and the system buckles, the
misery grows. Something needs to be done. Soon.
That is the New York Times. Just yesterday, they followed up with
another piece: ``When Will Congress Get Serious About the Suffering at
the Border?''
So for those scoring at home, President Trump and the New York Times
editorial board are actually on the same side. It seems like everyone
across the country understands that we should provide this funding--
everyone except Democrats here in Washington who have become so
addicted to picking political fights with the Trump administration that
they are letting even their most basic responsibilities slip.
Well, I will have a lot more to say on this subject in the days
ahead. I think everyone understands quite well that my friends across
the aisle are not personal fans of the President. We got that.
I would suggest it is time to get over it. The security of the United
States and the humanitarian conditions on our border cannot afford to
go underfunded any longer just because Democrats cannot bring
themselves to give this White House anything it asks for.
