On the recordJuly 25, 2018
I rise today on another subject, but I want to touch on the conversation that has been going on here on the floor. I agree with my colleague, my friend, the Senator from Illinois. Our country is better than this. I had an opportunity to visit one of the facilities in Virginia where some of the children who had been separated were placed. It was a good facility, and they were well cared for, but it still begged the question of unaccompanied minors being separated from their families. I saw on a news report today that some of the children have been reunited, but for close to 1,400 of these kids, the determination has been made that they should not be reunited with their parents. What does it mean to those kids? What does it mean to those families? What does it also mean, then, to our country's obligation to take care of these kids since we are now saying that we are not going to reunite them with their families? Not only from a moral sense, but does that mean that we pick up a long-term obligation on these children? If there had been a really thought-through policy, I think we would have had some of these answers on the front end. So I join my colleagues on both sides of the aisle who want to get to a bipartisan solution set here. I think the images that have been etched on so many Americans' minds when they saw the images of children being separated from their moms and dads at such an early age actually led to a moral gag reflex.…





