We’re Working Every Day On A Compromise That Funds Ukraine, Gives The President Tools To Manage The Border, And Lives Up To American Values
WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Thursday spoke on the U.S. Senate floor on the stakes of the supplemental negotiations. Murphy made the case for funding Ukraine in its hour of need while also working to find a compromise with Republicans that both helps the Administration better manage the border and lives up to fundamental American values.
On the stakes in Ukraine, Murphy said: “Never before in our lifetime has a large nuclear-armed nation like Russia invaded a neighboring country with the sole purpose of destruction, annihilation, and annexation. If they succeed, if Kyiv does become a Russian city, the post-World War II order is over. And no one here is really prepared to deal and live with those consequences. The rules that have governed the past seventy years, that have provided us with relative global stability, the rules that have protected our country and our economy, which relies on a stable global system, they will all be permanently broken. Consider the Pandora’s box open.”
He continued: “I wish it were hyperbole to say that the fate of the free world is at stake. And I wish we weren’t in a position where my Republican colleagues, who say that they support Ukraine, weren’t making funding for Ukraine dependent on solving one of the most vexing, most difficult political issues in American politics: the issue of immigration and border policy.”
On the importance of the asylum system, Murphy said: “I think it’s easy for us here in Washington to forget when we’re talking about asylum, that we’re often talking about a life and death choice for people. We’re talking about men and women and children who are not safe in their home countries — who will die if they stay —who don’t want to leave their family, their neighbors, everything they know, but they are so desperate that they feel they have no choice but to make the often life-threatening journey to the United States of America.”
Murphy pushed back on Republicans’ criticism of parole authority: “The Uniting for Ukraine and Cuba, Nicaragua, Haiti, and Venezuela parole programs have enabled more than a quarter of a million people to come to the United States safely after having passed an extensive vetting and background check process and also obtaining private sponsorship—[from] families here in the United States. They have the ability to work, and they are not forced to take the dangerous journey to the southern border. It denies smugglers and cartels the ability to exploit all of these people. It gives us a chance to vet those individuals before they show up at the United States. And what has happened since these programs have been put into place? A significant drop in unlawful encounters at the southern border from individuals from these countries. Unlawful crossings of Venezuelans are down 50%. Unlawful crossings of Cubans, Nicaraguans, and Haitians are down 90%. This is stunning but important progress.”
“In November of last year, for instance, Border Patrol encountered 34,000 Nicaraguans on the border. A year and a half ago. This past November, Border Patrol encountered 4,000. 34,000 before parole, 4,000 after parole. No other tool at the President’s disposal has been so effective in reducing unauthorized crossings as has parole. Limiting this ability will only push more people to cross in between the ports of entry, exacerbating the very problem that Republicans claim they want to solve,” he added.
Murphy concluded: “I think we all do agree that what is happening at the southwest border today – the number of people that are crossing every day compared to the resources we have – it’s untenable. And Democrats, we do want to give the Administration tools to better manage the border. But we’re not interested in taking away tools that have a proven track record of success.”
A full transcript of his remarks can be found below:
“The weapons that we send to Ukraine—they aren’t used in military parades; they don’t sit in warehouses. They are used by the Ukrainians to fend off the brutal Russian invasion of that country. They are used by Ukraine to maintain that country’s sovereignty and independence.
“At the height of the summer offensive, Russia was firing 10,000 artillery rounds per day at Ukraine. In response, Ukraine was firing back 7,000 rounds per day. But by the end of last year, just a few weeks ago, Ukraine’s stocks were so low that they were firing just 2,000 rounds per day. Russia is still firing 10,000 rounds per day.
“I want my colleagues to step back for a moment, and imagine you are in a duel with an opponent where in each round, your opponent has five bullets for every one that you have. You’re not going to survive that fight. That’s not a fair fight. Soon you won’t even have one bullet. How long do you think that fight continues for you?
“Right now, ammunition levels are so low that a Ukrainian artillery brigade that used to fire 50 to 90 shells per day is now forced to ration its supplies, down to 10 to 20 shells per day. That is barely enough for them to just defend themselves, let alone push forward or reclaim any additional territory.
“And it’s not just ammunition that Ukraine desperately needs right now – it’s supplies for their air defense systems as well. For two years now, Russia has not had air superiority, except once, in the city of Mariupol. And there, Russian bombers flattened the city. In two months, 95 percent of the city was destroyed, and 25,000 people were killed.
“But elsewhere in Ukraine, the casualties are much more limited because Russian planes were being shot down.
“So perhaps it’s no coincidence that just a few days ago, Russia launched a major missile barrage at Kyiv in what was the single largest attack since the start of the war. Why do I say that perhaps it wasn’t a coincidence?
“Well maybe it’s because Russia is pushing all of its chips in on a bet that Ukraine is not only going to run out of ammunition, it’s going to run out of air defense missiles. And with no American funding to replenish those systems, Russia would then be able to destroy the missile defense batteries themselves, finally giving them a free hand to completely decimate every single Ukrainian city.
“They will apply the Mariupol tactics, the Mariupol playbook, to Odessa, to Kharkiv, and to Kyiv, and millions will die and Kyiv will become a Russian city.
“While this body hesitates to resupply Ukraine, Russia is putting one-third of its entire budget for 2024 toward its war effort. Russia is receiving new ballistic missiles, artillery rounds, military equipment, and attack drones from its allies: North Korea, China, and Iran.
“And yet we are still deciding whether we, as Ukraine’s primary ally, are going to support them in the fight to come. I just want to remind my colleagues what’s at stake in this fight. We are making a decision as we speak right now as to whether Ukraine is an independent sovereign nation or whether Ukraine, once again, is a Russian state, a Russian vassal, a Russian province. Whether Kyiv is an independent city or whether Kyiv is a Russian city.
“Never before in our lifetime has a large nuclear-armed nation like Russia invaded a neighboring country with the sole purpose of destruction, annihilation, and annexation. If they succeed, if Kyiv does become a Russian city, the post-World War II order is over. Is over. And no one here is really prepared to deal and live with those consequences.
“The rules that have governed the past seventy years, that have provided us with relative global stability, the rules that have protected our country and our economy, which relies on a stable global system, they will all be permanently broken. Consider the Pandora’s box open.
“I wish it were hyperbole to say that the fate of the free world is at stake. And I wish we weren’t in a position where my Republican colleagues, who say that they support Ukraine, weren’t making funding for Ukraine dependent on solving one of the most vexing, most difficult political issues in American politics: the issue of immigration and border policy.
“But that’s where we are. My Republican colleagues say they will let Vladimir Putin destroy and occupy Ukraine if we can’t come to a conclusion on immigration policy and border policy. I wish we weren’t here, but we are.
“And so Democrats are at the table, trying to find a compromise that helps the Biden Administration and future administrations better manage the situation at the border, while also living up to our fundamental American values.
“I wish we weren’t here. I wish we could just all say that we believe that it is in the interest of the United States of America to support Ukraine, to make sure that they have what they need to defend themselves, and that we are going to get that job done. And we are going to sit down and try to work together on the crisis over the broken immigration system. Tying the two together in this way threatens to become the biggest gift America has ever given Vladimir Putin.
“And so I want to focus the remaining part of my remarks today on what I think we can do to help the Administration manage the border. But I also want to tell you what I think we cannot, and should not, do. The changes to immigration law that would fundamentally compromise our nation’s values and moral underpinnings, as a nation built by immigrants.
“I think it’s easy for us here in Washington to forget when we’re talking about asylum, that we’re often talking about a life and death choice for people. We’re talking about men and women and children who are not safe in their home countries – who will die if they stay – who don’t want to leave their family, their neighbors, everything they know, but they are so desperate that they feel they have no choice but to make the often life-threatening journey to the United States of America.
“We’re talking about people like Sandra Gutierrez. She lived in Honduras, and like any parent, Sandra wanted to make sure that her kids were safe at the school they attended every day. But they weren’t. They were under regular threat from armed gangs. So she joined together with her local parent board in her Honduran town, and started working with other moms to try to get the violent gangs that were a constant presence at her kids’ school away from campus.
“But guess what happened to Sandra? That work made Sandra a target. These armed gangs stalked her, they hunted her, they threatened to kill her and her children if she didn’t stop and if she didn’t meet their demands. And so she did what any of us would do, what any parent would do. She protected her children. She left Honduras, where she would be hunted by these gangs, and she came to find asylum in the United States of America.
“It’s people like Aliyah, a journalist in Cameroon who wrote powerful stories exposing discrimination by the Cameroonian government and sexual assaults committed by powerful people in her country. She reported the truth, and that made her a target. She was attacked, beaten, detained, imprisoned. Not by gangs—by her own government. After she escaped and fled her country – the place she had lived her entire life, where she had built a reputation, a career – she found asylum here in the United States of America.
“It is true that many people who come to the United States seeking asylum do not have a story like Sandra or Aliyah. It is true that many immigrants seeking asylum are actually here as economic migrants. And so, I agree that we should come together and do what we can to provide a fully funded and much more effective and efficient asylum system to determine which people showing up at our border are like Sandra and Aliyah with legitimate asylum cases where the United States of America is the place where they can have their life saved versus the people who are just trying to use the asylum system to find work.
“And so I support building a better system. But I don’t support proposals that completely shut off the ability of completely the ability for people to come to the United States to save their lives.
“And I think it’s really important that we understand when you’re talking about asylum, we are talking about a system that works for thousands of people who are fleeing terror and torture. It does not work when many people are using it as an end-route to come to the United States to work. But we can solve that problem, we can fix that system, while still allowing people like those brave women that I talked about to have the ability to come to the United States to save their life.
“We’re also talking about another topic. A topic that a lot of Republicans are discussing in the hallways these days. And that’s parole. It’s one of the most important tools that the administration has at its disposal to respond to humanitarian crises all around the world and to manage the flow of individuals at the border.
“Immigration parole authority has been used by every single president in the last 70 years to provide relief for individuals who are fleeing danger and persecution. Republican and Democratic presidents have used this authority to protect Soviet Jews fleeing persecution, Cubans during the Cold War, and most recently, Ukrainians and Afghans fleeing violence and unrest.
“Despite what some Republicans will have you believe, the Biden Administration’s use of parole has created more – not less – order at the border. The Uniting for Ukraine and Cuba, Nicaragua, Haiti, and Venezuela parole programs have enabled more than a quarter of a million people to come to the United States safely after having passed an extensive vetting and background check process and also obtaining private sponsorship—families here in the United States. They have the ability to work, and they are not forced to take the dangerous journey to the southern border. It denies smugglers and cartels the ability to exploit all of these people. It gives us a chance to vet those individuals before they show up at the United States.
“And what has happened since these programs have been put into place? A significant drop in unlawful encounters at the southern border from individuals from these countries. Unlawful crossings of Venezuelans are down 50%. Unlawful crossings of Cubans, Nicaraguans, and Haitians are down 90%. This is stunning but important progress.
“In November of last year, for instance, Border Patrol encountered 34,000 Nicaraguans on the border. A year and a half ago. This past November, Border Patrol encountered 4,000. 34,000 before parole, 4,000 after parole.
“No other tool at the President’s disposal has been so effective in reducing unauthorized crossings as has parole. Limiting this ability will only push more people to cross in between the ports of entry, exacerbating the very problem that Republicans claim they want to solve.
“I’m not saying that we shouldn’t have a conversation about reforming this practice. I’m at the table. But to completely deny the President the ability to use parole is to make the situation at the southwest border more unmanageable, not less unmanageable.
“I think we all do agree that what is happening at the southwest border today – the number of people that are crossing every day compared to the resources we have – it’s untenable. And Democrats, we do want to give the Administration tools to better manage the border. But we’re not interested in taking away tools that have a proven track record of success.
“This work is not easy. I wish we weren’t here. I wish we were passing immigration reform and moving funding for Ukraine, that the two hadn’t been tied together. But I accept that this is what has been made necessary by Republicans to get Ukraine the funding it needs.
“And I’m really grateful for the progress that we have been able to make. Senator Lankford, Senator Sinema, myself, the White House, members of leadership have been working together throughout the holiday, nonstop every single day trying to find a compromise that lets us fund Ukraine, that lets us fund Israel, that gives the President new tools to manage the southwest border, but that also respects fundamental American values. That honors our tradition of immigration.
“We’re not there yet but we’re close. And to get to that finish line, so that we can all join together in the effort to support Ukraine, that’s going to mean that both Democrats and Republicans have to compromise. Neither side is going to get everything that they want. I wish Republicans would choose to support Ukraine just because it’s the right thing to do. But we are where we are, we’ve made a lot of progress, and to me, the stakes are just far too high to give up.”
###
