The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTION” mentioning Patrick J. Leahy was published in the Senate section on pages S4830-S4831 on July 12.
Of the 100 senators in 117th Congress, 24 percent were women, and 76 percent were men, according to the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress.
Senators' salaries are historically higher than the median US income.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTION
By Mr. LEAHY:
S. 2311. A bill making emergency supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2021, and for other purposes; read the first time.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, over the weeks, I have been rising on the Senate floor to urge that the Senate take up and pass an emergency supplemental. So I am rising again to tell you what that emergency supplemental is, even though I have stated it over and over again. It is to deal with the fallout from the violent insurrection that took place at the seat of our democracy on January 6.
I have been making this call for 2 months now. I am frustrated and beginning to feel a little bit like a broken record. Just days before this Chamber left for the July 4 recess, I sounded the alarm that time was running out. It is even more so today. The Senate has only a few weeks to act. If we do nothing, the Capitol Police will deplete salaries funding sometime in August. And for anybody who hasn't looked at the calendar, that is next month. This means that the men and women who protect the seat of democracy and Members of Congress and their staff in this building and the support staff who keep the building running may face furloughs and significant impacts to the department's programs and mission asset support, including the hiring of much needed new sworn officers. These are the same women and men who fought and bled--and some died--for everything this hallowed building stands for. That happened on January 6.
We owe them more than just a paycheck. As a result of this budget crunch, purchases of critical equipment--like respirators, ballistic helmets, protective gear--and training that has all been delayed. Efforts to implement the department's wellness program to address mental health concerns that followed the January 6 insurrection have been put on the back burner. These police officers stood with us on that horrible day. Shouldn't we stand with them now and pass the emergency appropriations to address these shortfalls?
And I point out that it is not only the Capitol Police that we owe. Our distinguished Presiding Officer served with distinction in our military. I think of the days after January 6, when tens and thousands of men and women from the National Guard from all over the country came to secure our Nation's Capital ahead of the inauguration and beyond. They were called, they came, and they appeared here. Like many other Senators, I thank them for their service. But unless Congress acts, the National Guard will be forced to cut training they need to prepare for overseas deployments and responses at home to make up for the costs incurred as a result of January 6.
If we have, as we often do, forest fires, hurricanes, and floods that hit our individual States, we are going to want to call on the National Guard. But what we are seeing now, if we don't pass this bill, is this: Gee, come when we call you, and the check may be in the mail a year or 2 or 3 years later or never at all.
Now, we don't budget for an insurrection, but it has been 187 days since the violent mob stormed the very Chamber we are standing in now, sitting in the same Presiding Officer's chair where our distinguished Presiding Officer now sits. My memory of the growing roar of that mob echoing down the hallway as the Capitol Police whisked us to safety has not faded. It hasn't faded from the consciousness of the American people or the rest of the world.
It has been 53 days since the House passed its own security supplemental, and I was shocked that not a single Republican voted for it. So I provided my Republican colleagues here in the Senate with a proposal to address these pressing needs and many others. I did that over a month ago, and I urged that we begin negotiations in earnest. Only now have they come to the table with a proposal. While I appreciate them bringing something, it is a pretty small something. It is a proposal that does not provide the appropriate resources to secure the Capitol or address the urgent needs that have arisen since January 6.
The images of the mob breaking through windows and forcing their way through doors exposed the truth. The Capitol and its office buildings are not impenetrable. It is not a fortress. The windows can be broken. The doors can be breached. This complex is no longer shrouded with the protection of belief that it is not possible to storm these Halls. Much like the windows, that protection was shattered, and it was broadcast to the whole world on January 6. See, the emperor has no clothes.
Unfortunately, the Republican proposal would not adequately address our vulnerabilities.
I have been very clear saying over and over again that I don't want to militarize our Capitol in the wake of January 6. It is important that the Capitol campus that I first saw as a teenager with my mother and father remain open for citizens from all walks of life to come and enjoy. It is their democracy after all. But we can and we must invest in securing the Capitol in a way that will address our vulnerabilities, protect Members and staff, and still keep us open to the public. I am confident that we can strike that balance.
We also have a responsibility to pay for the unforeseen costs of investing and prosecuting these violent insurgents. The FBI, the U.S. Marshals, the DC Metropolitan Police Department, and numerous other law enforcement agencies hurried to defend the Capitol at the urgent call, and we are all thankful for that.
Federal prosecutors have charged more than 500 people in more than 40 States with participating in the attack, and arrests continue almost daily. We have a responsibility to support these Agencies in dealing with January 6 and its aftermath, but it is not addressed in the Republican proposal. I am tired of hearing people saying we are in favor of law and order and law enforcement, but we just don't want to pay for it.
It should not be lost on us that we were not the ones to sweep up the shattered glasses, scrub the floors and walls of this building on that day and throughout the night. We cannot turn our backs on the dedicated public servants, the women and men who had to process that trauma that day as they boarded up shattered windows and broken doors. And it is a trauma that came at the end of a yearlong pandemic.
It should not be lost on us that during the darkest hours of the pandemic, these are the same public servants who came to work to clean our offices, ensuring our safety and the safety of our staff. We have a responsibility to pay for these and other costs that were incurred as a result of the pandemic on the Capitol Complex and its staff.
Now, of course, we did not budget for an insurrection. We don't budget for a global pandemic. We have been forced to rob Peter to pay Paul to keep our congressional community safe and healthy. The scars of COVID have not healed in our own Capitol community, and they have not been addressed in the other party's proposal.
But we can't also ignore the world around us. We have another emergency brewing. This one is in Afghanistan, and we have a moral responsibility to address it. I have been talking for 2 years now of an imminent departure from Afghanistan. Now it is happening, and we must ensure that the brave Afghans who stood with America are not abandoned as we conclude our mission in that country.
I am fortunate that there is bipartisan support for this effort. I think this is something where Republicans and Democrats have to come together. We made a promise. Whether you supported the war or not, we made a promise to the Afghans who risked their own lives to support and protect our troops and our country. We made a promise to them, and as a country our word should be our bond. And we all agree--I believe both Republicans and Democrats--that bond is not going to be broken on our watch. And if we don't address this now, if we don't keep our word now, then when?
The bill I am introducing today includes funds to care for the inevitable flood of Afghan refugees to neighboring countries and an increase in the number of Afghan special immigrant visas. They must be included in this package because the crisis is unfolding now.
There is no dispute about the urgency and the importance of standing with our Afghan allies. My colleagues on the other side do not address it in their proposal. I hope they will.
So where are we? A violent insurrection that none of us thought we would ever see in our lifetime happened. A pandemic that we thought we would never see in our lifetime happened. And the President has announced the withdrawal of the American troops from Afghanistan. These events created urgent needs that must be met.
My Republican colleagues are proposing that we deal with these problems piecemeal, address some of them now and others sometime, somewhere, someday. But a piecemeal approach that jumps from one problem to the next is no way to govern. I have been here long enough to know that a promise to do it later is no promise at all.
It has been 53 days since the House passed a security supplemental, and only now are my Republican colleagues coming to the negotiating table. I don't want to wait another 53 days more before we address these pressing matters. We can't govern by crisis, and we can't legislate at the convenience of either party. So I am introducing my comprehensive proposal today.
To make sure it is not a surprise to anybody, I shared this proposal with my Republican colleagues more than a month ago--a month ago--and I am sharing it with the full Senate today. It addresses all the needs arising from the tragic events of January 6 and the global pandemic.
This is the best way forward. We owe it to our Members in both parties. We owe it to our staff. We owe it to the Capitol Police. We owe it to the National Guard, and we owe it to numerous others. We must act, and we must act in a comprehensive way. We have only one shot at this. We have a responsibility to get it right.
With that, Madam President, at the end of my remarks, I introduce a bill making emergency supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2021, and for other purposes. I ask to have it held at the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill is received
______
By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mr. Padilla):
S. 2313. A bill for the relief of Maria Isabel Bueso Barrera, Alberto Bueso Mendoza, and Karla Maria Barrera De Bueso; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, today I am reintroducing a bill for the private relief of Maria Isabel Bueso Barrera and her parents. Ms. Bueso is a Guatemalan national living in Concord, California. She has a rare medical condition, and her removal from the United States would deprive her of lifesaving medical care.
Ms. Bueso suffers from a rare, life-threatening disorder called Mucopolysaccharidosis Type VI (MPS-VI), a rare genetic condition caused by the absence of an enzyme that is needed for the growth of healthy bones and connective tissues. Ms. Bueso uses a wheelchair for mobility, has a shunt in her brain, and requires a tracheotomy to help her breathe.
In 2003, Ms. Bueso and her family came to the United States at the invitation of doctors who were conducting a clinical trial to treat her condition. That trial led to Food and Drug Administration-approved treatment for MPS-VI. Ms. Bueso now receives this life-saving treatment every week at UCSF Children's Hospital in Oakland, CA, where she unoes a 6-hour infusion of a prescription drug that replaces the enzyme that people with MPS-VI lack. Ms. Bueso has participated in six other medical trials.
For the past 10 years, Isabel and her family received deferred action from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services so that she could continue receiving the treatments that keep her alive. This treatment is not available in Guatemala.
On August 13, 2019, USCIS notified Ms. Bueso and her family that their extensions of deferred action were denied, and that they would be deported if they did not leave the United States within 33 days.
This decision was effectively a death sentence for Ms. Bueso. USCIS ultimately reconsidered its decision and granted Ms. Bueso and her parents an additional extension of deferred action.
Ms. Bueso has beaten the odds because of the life-saving treatment that she has received in the United States. She is now 26 years old and a 2018 graduate of California State University, East Bay. She has become an outspoken advocate on behalf of people with rare diseases. Her family pays taxes, owns a home, and is active in their community.
The Bueso family should be allowed to remain in California, where they will continue to enrich their community, and where Isabel will be able to receive the care that allows her to survive and thrive.
The legislation that I am introducing today would provide a permanent solution for Isabel and her parents. I ask my colleagues to support this private bill, which makes the Bueso family eligible for issuance of an immigrant visa or for adjustment of status.
I also ask unanimous consent that a copy of the bill be included in the Record.
S. 2313
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR MARIA ISABEL BUESO
BARRERA, ALBERTO BUESO MENDOZA, AND KARLA MARIA
BARRERA DE BUESO.
(a) In General.--Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b) of section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1151), Maria Isabel Bueso Barrera, Alberto Bueso Mendoza, and Karla Maria Barrera De Bueso shall each be eligible for issuance of an immigrant visa or for adjustment of status to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence upon filing an application for issuance of an immigrant visa under section 204 of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1154) or for adjustment of status to lawful permanent resident.
(b) Adjustment of Status.--If Maria Isabel Bueso Barrera, Alberto Bueso Mendoza, or Karla Maria Barrera De Bueso enters the United States before the filing deadline specified in subsection (c), Maria Isabel Bueso Barrera, Alberto Bueso Mendoza, or Karla Maria Barrera De Bueso shall be considered to have entered and remained lawfully in the United States and shall be eligible for adjustment of status under section 245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1255) as of the date of the enactment of this Act.
(c) Application and Payment of Fees.--Subsections (a) and
(b) shall apply only if the applications for issuance of immigrant visas or the applications for adjustment of status are filed with appropriate fees not later than two years after the date of the enactment of this Act.
(d) Reduction of Immigrant Visa Numbers.--Upon the granting of immigrant visas or permanent resident status to Maria Isabel Bueso Barrera, Alberto Bueso Mendoza, and Karla Maria Barrera De Bueso, the Secretary of State shall instruct the proper officer to reduce by three, during the current or next following fiscal year--
(1) the total number of immigrant visas that are made available to natives of the country of birth of Maria Isabel Bueso Barrera, Alberto Bueso Mendoza, and Karla Maria Barrera De Bueso under section 203(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(a)); or
(2) if applicable, the total number of immigrant visas that are made available to natives of the country of birth of Maria Isabel Bueso Barrera, Alberto Bueso Mendoza, and Karla Maria Barrera De Bueso under section 202(e) of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1152(e)).
(e) PAYGO.--The budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of complying with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, shall be determined by reference to the latest statement titled ``Budgetary Effects of PAYGO Legislation'' for this Act, submitted for printing in the Congressional Record by the Chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, provided that such statement has been submitted prior to the vote on passage.
____________________
Alerts Sign-up