Sen. Flake Called Out for Overstating Role of Border Security Commission
Last week, Sen. Marco Rubio sprinted to the airwaves to defend the Gang of Eight's legislation after it had been attacked during the first round of committee markup, but his description of the bill wasn't exactly accurate. Continuing that trend, A Gang of Eight member who also sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Jeff Flake, wasn't exactly accurate himself in his description of the bill's "triggers" when they came under attack from Senators John Cornyn and Jeff Sessions on Thursday.
Shortly after the markup began, Sen. Sessions introduced an amendment that would require an electronic monitoring system for temporary guest-workers. The amendment led to a broader discussion over the electronic exit-entry system that's one of the four "triggers" in the Gang's legislation. Sen. Flake took the opportunity to explain the the "triggers":
I think there may be just a little misunderstanding about what constitutes an actual trigger, submittal of a plan or substantial completion. With this legislation, what we're saying before RPI status (amnesty) can start for anyone, there has to be a plan submitted, but keep in mind that plan has to be substantially deployed.
We're off to a pretty good start, and actually, Sen. Flake even quoted the legislation directly in describing the first "trigger." On page 11 of the bill, it says, "the Comprehensive Southern Border Security Strategy has been submitted to Congress and is substantially deployed and substantially operational."
This all sounds fine and dandy, but Sen. Flake is making the trigger sound stronger than it really is. There's no Congressional oversight, so the requirements to be "substantially deployed and substantially operational" only have to be certified by the Secretary of Homeland Security. In optimistic anticipation of the bill's passage, it's likely that Sec. Janet Napolitano is already working on the Southern Border Security Strategy because she's the last person that would slow down the amnesty should the bill actually pass.
If it does not produce 90% effectiveness after a five year period, the Department of Homeland Security loses control to a local commission made up of border governors, local ranchers, and others who will spend an additional $2 billion.
This is where Sen. Flake loses it. He's correct in stating that if after a 5-year period it does not produce a 90% effective rate a commission is formed. But to say DHS "loses control" is not just an overstatement; it's simply not true.
The Southern Border Security Commission is described on pages 14-18 of the bill, but it's important to note that two of the four-plus pages simply define who sits on the commission, the election of a chair, what happens if there's a vacancy, and guidelines for creating commission rules.
On the bottom of page 16, the Gang of Eight finally gets into the commission's duties:
DUTIES. — The Commission’s primary responsibility shall be making recommendations to the President, the Secretary, and Congress on policies to achieve and maintain the border security goal specified in section 3(b)…
The Department of Homeland Security doesn't "lose control" to the border commission as Sen. Flake incorrectly stated. It simply makes recommendations to the feds. There is $2 billion authorized for the commission, but that could be in the bill simply to give the Secretary an incentive to trigger the commission. After all, what bureaucrat doesn't want to spend $2 billion of taxpayer money?
Sen. Flake also said the commission will be made up of "border governors, local ranchers, and others." But here's a list of who actually sits on the 10-person commission:
- 2 members appointed by the President,
- 2 members appointed by the Senate,
- 2 members appointed by the House, and
- 1 member from each of the border states.
As you can see, there's not a whole lot of ranchers on this list, and I'm assuming the "others" that he refers to would be the six political appointees from Washington.
There are few in Congress who have actually read the Gang of Eight's bill and called them out on their exaggerated facts. Thankfully, Sen. John Cornyn took the lead on Thursday:
SEN. CORNYN: "In fact, the commission has no power other than to create another plan."
SEN. FLAKE: "It's not just the submittal that triggers anything. Before the adjustment of status, it has to be substantially deployed."
SEN. CORNYN: "I don't underestimate the sincerity of the Senator or the Gang of Eight in their aspirations, hopes, and dreams for this. But it's a plan. It's a hypothetical plan, and we don't know if it'll ever be implemented."
CHRIS CHMIELENSKI is the Director of Content & Activism for NumbersUSA