On the recordFebruary 4, 2015
I appreciate the work my colleague has done on this funding bill, and I think we certainly agree on the funding that is in the bill. That is not what the debate we are having is about. I ask the Senator from North Dakota if he has heard the comments of Chairman John Carter of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, a Republican from Texas, who said: ``Ultimately, there may be a clean bill.'' If the House is acknowledging that ultimately we may have a clean bill to fund the Department of Homeland Security, doesn't it make sense that we would move forward to get this funding done, and we would make sure there is certainty to address the risks facing this country? We can debate immigration. I don't think there is anybody on the Democratic side who doesn't want to have an immigration debate. We are happy to have it. But we should have that as a separate debate. As the Republican majority knows, they control the debate in the Senate. So they can decide to bring up an immigration bill as soon as we pass funding for the Department of Homeland Security. So I hope, as the House suggests, ultimately there is going to be a clean bill and that we would pass it as soon as possible to provide certainty and then move on to debate the other issues facing this country. I ask my colleague from North Dakota if he has spoken to the chairman of the House Appropriations Homeland Security Subcommittee, and does he share his view that ultimately there may be a clean bill?





