Shaheen Urges Colleagues to Pass Bipartisan Border Security Legislation to Stem Flow of Fentanyl
(Washington, D.C.) – U.S. Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) took to the Senate floor today to urge her colleagues to support bipartisan legislation to secure the border and stem the flow of fentanyl into the United States. The legislation was negotiated at the beginning of the year but was ultimately rejected by Republicans. If passed, this compromise bill would provide long-term solutions to address many of the challenges at the border. Senator Shaheen’s remarks can be viewed here.
Key quotes from Senator Shaheen:
- “I agree with my colleagues: we have a crisis at the southern border. And in New Hampshire, it is affecting us because there are too many deadly drugs flowing into our country and not enough technology and equipment and personnel to stop it. So, it's not every day that I agree with my Republican colleagues on an issue as big as the border, but on this one, I agree.”
- “It’s a historic agreement to supply the border with critical resources that are necessary to increase security, to stop the flow of illicit drugs and to better protect all Americans. […] But, unfortunately, our colleagues walked away from the strictest border security deal that we've had in decades all because Donald Trump told them to make it a campaign issue rather than do what's in the best interest of the country.”
- “In my home state of New Hampshire, we have lost too many people because they've died from fentanyl overdoses. In the period from 2013 to 2023, New Hampshire lost 4,616 people from drug overdoses—the majority of those people died as a result of fentanyl. And anything—anything—we can do to cut down on the amount of fentanyl that's coming into the United States, we ought to be doing it.”
Below is a full transcript of Shaheen’s remarks as delivered.
Madam president, I agree with my colleagues: we have a crisis at the southern border, and in New Hampshire it is affecting us because there are too many deadly drugs flowing into our country and not enough technology and equipment and personnel to stop it.
So, it's not every day that I agree with my Republican colleagues on an issue as big as the border, but on this one, I agree.
We needed to act. That's why a group of negotiators, Republicans were led by Senator Lankford, Democrats by Senator Murphy and Senator Sinema. I appreciate the work that all three of them did.
They rolled up their sleeves, they got to work, for months they passed paper back and forth. They ironed out big and small details of the bill that we voted on, that’s before us, and the final agreement is the strictest—I think that’s worth repeating—it is the strictest border security legislation that we’ve seen, certainly since my time in the Senate.
It’s a historic agreement to supply the border with critical resources that are necessary to increase security, to stop the flow of illicit drugs and to better protect all Americans.
Now, our Republican colleagues were for this bill until Donald Trump put his thumb on the scale and said: ‘Don't fix the border; I want to campaign on it as a crisis.’
And as we heard, he acknowledged, we should blame him for the fact that the border deal failed.
But, unfortunately, our colleagues walked away from the strictest border security deal that we've had in decades all because Donald Trump told them to make it a campaign issue rather than do what's in the best interest of the country.
Now, we need to pass this bill because it includes more funding for identifying, tracking and stopping fentanyl at the border.
I don't know about all of our colleagues, but in my home state of New Hampshire, we have lost too many people because they've died from fentanyl overdoses.
In the period from 2013 to 2023, New Hampshire lost 4,616 people from drug overdoses—the majority of those people died as a result of fentanyl.
And anything—anything—we can do to cut down on the amount of fentanyl that's coming into the United States, we ought to be doing it.
We know that fentanyl has moved across the U.S.-Mexico border in huge quantities, often in cars and trucks, and we know it comes across—almost one hundred percent—at our ports of entry.
And they can't search every vehicle in every way, and that's why we need technology. We need to be able to scan vehicles for drugs and other contraband.
We need to make sure they can expand these capacities, which is why there’s a provision in the bill to provide significant increases in funding for CBP to deploy more nonintrusive inspection technology that would more efficiently and effectively search for fentanyl and other drugs.
The bill also gives Immigration and Customs Enforcement increased funding to focus on counter-fentanyl investigations and enforcement because we need more boots on the ground dedicated to finding fentanyl and other drugs, and dedicated to holding those accountable who are bringing these deadly drugs into our country.
The danger of the continued fentanyl epidemic demands more action from Congress. We need more funding, we need more agents on our borders and with this bill, we would do just that.
Now, New Hampshire also doesn't border our southern border, but it does border Canada, which has the longest international border in the world—over 5,000 miles.
New Hampshire has a very short piece of that, but there are many stretches of the border, particularly in New Hampshire, that are remote, that are sparsely populated and unlike many other borders, not militarized.
That means our northern border is vulnerable to exploitation, and we have a program that we have had in past budgets called operation Stonegarden—it's in the Department of Homeland Security so Senator Peters I know knows that program.
But it helps police departments, providing annual grants to help them particularly in rural areas who are really struggling to fund normal operations, let alone responsibilities along the border.
These are funds that allow police departments to pay overtime for officers to patrol the border along with the U.S. Border Patrol.
Sadly, in the northern border, most of those funds have been diverted to the southern border and many of our agents who have patrolled the northern border have been diverted to the southern border.
That's a challenge for states like New Hampshire and others where we have large sections of that border that are rural, where in parts of New Hampshire's border, we don't even have access to internet. So there are cameras on the border, but they can't pick up anything because we don't have a signal.
But despite this program's importance, it's been underfunded for a number of years, leaving states without sufficient resources.
So, one of the pieces that's in this legislation that we're going to vote on tomorrow is $100 million with 25% of it that would go to states that are not on the southwest border, states like New Hampshire, to make sure that our law enforcement is also supported and well-funded.
So, we have a lot to do with our border. Passing this bill tomorrow, getting our Republican colleagues to join us would make a huge difference in addressing the challenges at our southern border.
I hope that they will join us, that they will put aside the opposition from Donald Trump and that they will do what's in the best interest of the country, not what's in the best interest of Donald Trump.
Thank you, Madam President. I yield the floor.
###
