[House Hearing, 116 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                    IMMIGRANTS AS ESSENTIAL WORKERS
                            DURING COVID-19

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                   SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION AND 
                               CITIZENSHIP

                                 OF THE

                       COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                     ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION

                               __________

                     WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2020

                               __________

                           Serial No. 116-87

                               __________

         Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary
         
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]         


               Available via: http://judiciary.house.gov

                              __________

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
45-494                     WASHINGTON : 2021                     
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------                 
              
               
                       COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

                    JERROLD NADLER, New York, Chair
               MARY GAY SCANLON, Pennsylvania, Vice-Chair

ZOE LOFGREN, California              DOUG COLLINS, Georgia, Ranking 
SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas                Member
STEVE COHEN, Tennessee               F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, Jr., 
HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr.,          Wisconsin
    Georgia                          STEVE CHABOT, Ohio
THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida          LOUIE GOHMERT, Texas
KAREN BASS, California               JIM JORDAN, Ohio
CEDRIC L. RICHMOND, Louisiana        KEN BUCK, Colorado
HAKEEM S. JEFFRIES, New York         JOHN RATCLIFFE, Texas
DAVID N. CICILLINE, Rhode Island     MARTHA ROBY, Alabama
ERIC SWALWELL, California            MATT GAETZ, Florida
TED LIEU, California                 MIKE JOHNSON, Louisiana
JAMIE RASKIN, Maryland               ANDY BIGGS, Arizona
PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington          TOM McCLINTOCK, California
VAL BUTLER DEMINGS, Florida          DEBBIE LESKO, Arizona
J. LUIS CORREA, California           GUY RESCHENTHALER, Pennsylvania
SYLVIA R. GARCIA, Texas              BEN CLINE, Virginia
JOE NEGUSE, Colorado                 KELLY ARMSTRONG, North Dakota
LUCY McBATH, Georgia                 W. GREGORY STEUBE, Florida
GREG STANTON, Arizona
MADELEINE DEAN, Pennsylvania
DEBBIE MUCARSEL-POWELL, Florida
VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas

        PERRY APELBAUM, Majority Staff Director & Chief of Staff
                 CHRIS HIXON, Minority Staff Director 
                                 
                                 ------                                

              SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP

                     ZOE LOFGREN, California, Chair
                PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington, Vice-Chair

J. LUIS CORREA, California           KEN BUCK, Colorado, Ranking Member
SYLVIA R. GARCIA, Texas              ANDY BIGGS, Arizona
JOE NEGUSE, Colorado                 TOM McCLINTOCK, California
DEBBIE MUCARSEL-POWELL, Florida      DEBBIE LESKO, Arizona
VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas              KELLY ARMSTRONG, North Dakota
SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas            W. GREGORY STEUBE, Florida
MARY GAY SCANLON, Pennsylvania

                    DAVID SHAHOULIAN, Chief Counsel
                    ANDREA LOVING, Minority Counsel
                            
                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              

                     Wednesday, September 23, 2020

                                                                   Page

                           OPENING STATEMENTS

The Honorable Zoe Lofgren, Chair, a Member of Congress from the 
  State of California, Subcommittee on Immigration and 
  Citizenship....................................................     1
The Honorable Ken Buck, Ranking Member, a Member of Congress from 
  the State of Colorado, Subcommittee on Immigration and 
  Citizenship....................................................     3
The Honorable Jim Jordan, a Member of Congress from the State of 
  Ohio, Committee on the Judiciary...............................     4

                               WITNESSES

Vicente Reyes, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals
  Oral Testimony.................................................     5
  Prepared Statement.............................................     8
Haeyoung Yoon, Senior Director of Policy, National Domestic 
  Workers Alliance
  Oral Testimony.................................................    16
  Prepared Statement.............................................    18
Tom Jawetz, Vice-President, Immigration Policy, Center for 
  American Progress
  Oral Testimony.................................................    24
  Prepared Statement.............................................    27
Dimple Navratil, Dimple's Imports, Racine, Wisconsin
  Oral Testimony.................................................    34
  Prepared Statement.............................................    36

          LETTER, MATERIAL, ARTICLES SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

Statements for the record from Adoptees For Justice, Adoptee 
  Rights Law Center..............................................    64
Statements for the record from U.S. Conference of Catholic 
  Bishops........................................................    68
Statements for the record from The American Federation of Labor 
  and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO).............    78
Statements for the record from Agricultural Workforce Coalition..    80
Statements for the record from Clif Bar & Company................    82
Statements for the record from The Ethics & Religious Liberty and 
  Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention..................    85
Statement for the record from Jessie Hahn, The National 
  Immigration Law Center.........................................    89
Statements for the record from H-2B Workforce Coalition,.........    94
Statements for the record from Charles ``Chuck'' Johnson, 
  President/CEO National Council For Adoption, Russell Moore, 
  President, Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty 
  Commission, Nancy Kay Blackwell, Executive Director, 
  Congressional Coalition on Adoption Institute (CCAI), and Holt 
  International..................................................   140
Statements for the record from Church World Service (CWS)........   143
Statements for the record from The Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee, 
  Texas, a Member of Congress from the State of Ohio, Committee 
  on the Judiciary...............................................   144

 
            IMMIGRANTS AS ESSENTIAL WORKERS DURING COVID-19

                              ----------                              


                     Wednesday, September 23, 2020

                        House of Representatives

              Subcommittee on Immigration and Citizenship

                       Committee on the Judiciary

                             Washington, DC

    The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2:01 p.m., in 
Room 2141, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Zoe Lofgren 
[chairman of the subcommittee] presiding.
    Present: Representatives Lofgren, Jayapal, Correa, Garcia, 
Neguse, Mucarsel-Powell, Escobar, Jackson Lee, Scanlon, Buck, 
Jordan, Biggs, McClintock, and Lesko.
    Staff Present: Anthony Valdez, Legislative Aide; John 
Williams, Parliamentarian; Betsy Lawrence, Counsel, 
Subcommittee on Immigration and Citizenship; Ami Shah, Counsel, 
Subcommittee on Immigration and Citizenship; Kyle Smithwick, 
Minority Counsel; Kiley Bidelman, Minority Clerk; and Andrea 
Loving, Minority Chief Counsel, Subcommittee on Immigration and 
Citizenship.
    Ms. Lofgren. The Subcommittee on Immigration and 
Citizenship will come to order.
    Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare a 
recess of the Subcommittee at any time.
    I will offer my opening statement, and as soon as Mr. Buck 
arrives, he will be recognized to offer his.
    We welcome everyone to this hearing Immigrants as Essential 
Workers During COVID-19.
    Before we begin, I'd like to remind Members that we have 
established an email address and distribution list dedicated to 
circulating exhibits, motions, or other written materials that 
Members might want to offer as part of our hearing today. If 
Members would like to submit materials, please send them to the 
email address that has been previously distributed to member 
offices, and we will circulate the materials to Members and 
staff as quickly as we can.
    I would also remind Members that guidance from the Office 
of the Attending Physician states that face coverings are 
required for all meetings in an enclosed space, such as 
Subcommittee hearings, and Members on all sides of the aisle 
are expected to wear a mask except when they are speaking.
    I'll now recognize myself for my opening statement.
    The COVID-19 pandemic has served as a wake-up call on a 
variety of social and economic issues, both globally and in the 
United States. The pandemic has exposed social injustices, 
vulnerabilities in our healthcare system, the fragility of our 
economy, and inequities in our education system, to name just a 
few.
    With today's hearing, we highlight another issue that has 
taken on new meaning in the wake of COVID-19: The fundamental 
role that immigrants have long played in key sectors of our 
economy.
    Since 2003, the Department of Homeland Security has 
identified certain industries as critical to national security, 
including public health, agriculture, and food processing. In 
the early days of the pandemic, DHS issued guidance to U.S. 
employers identifying certain workers as essential critical 
infrastructure workers.
    While many of us shifted to full-time telework, these 
workers had to continue to report in person. Each day, they 
risk their lives to ensure that America has a safe and 
plentiful food supply, they care for our children, tend to the 
elderly, sanitize our schools and public places. A significant 
portion of the essential workforce is comprised of immigrant 
workers.
    This Subcommittee has held many hearings over the years to 
examine the important role that immigrants play in certain 
economic sectors. Our first hearing this Congress focused on 
the growing labor challenges in the agricultural sector. To 
anyone that attended that hearing, it should come as no 
surprise that farmworkers were deemed essential during the 
pandemic.
    Today, as wildfires rage here in California and other parts 
of the West Coast, agricultural work is more dangerous than 
ever. In addition to dealing with the threat of COVID, many 
farmworkers must now quickly harvest at-risk crops in areas 
where the air is filled with ash and smoke.
    The COVID-19 pandemic has also exposed the essential role 
of immigrants in American life. Immigrant physicians, 
researchers, and other healthcare workers have been essential 
in the fight against COVID-19.
    Immigrants provide direct home care for more than 13 
million elderly and disabled Americans, many of whom have taken 
ill with COVID and require even greater assistance 
transitioning from hospital to home.
    A demand for childcare services has increased by almost 250 
percent over the past 20 years, and the void has been filled by 
immigrants. Today, one-fifth of the nearly 2 million early-
childhood educators in the United States are immigrants. As 
long as schools remain even partially closed, the childcare 
shortage will continue to be a significant roadblock to a full-
functioning economy.
    Many immigrant essential workers are undocumented and live 
under constant threat of removal. Many others are protected by 
temporary programs, such as the Deferred Action for Childhood 
Arrivals, or DACA, or the Temporary Protected Status, TPS, but 
they, too, live in fear as a result of the Administration's 
efforts to terminate these programs. They all deserve better.
    Over the past year and a half, the House has passed several 
bills that would provide protections to immigrant essential 
workers: H.R. 6, the American Dream and Promise Act, would 
provide lawful permanent residence to Dreamers and long-term 
TPS recipients; in addition to reforming the H-2A visa program, 
H.R. 5038, the bipartisan Farm Workforce Modernization Act, 
would provide legal status to thousands of farmworkers; and 
this past May, the HEROES Act, which would provide stimulus 
relief to individuals and businesses and protect essential 
workers from removal during the pandemic.
    Although these workers have been identified as essential 
during the COVID emergency, the truth could not be plainer: 
They are essential now and will remain so long after the 
pandemic has passed. Until all essential immigrant workers are 
protected through legal status and can easily participate in 
our economy and society, the United States will continue to 
fail to realize its full economic potential.
    At this point, I would like to recognize others for their 
opening statement.
    First, our Ranking Member, Mr. Buck, you are recognized for 
your opening statement.
    Mr. Buck. I thank the chair.
    I want to start by acknowledging the important role that 
legal immigrants and legal refugees play in my home State of 
Colorado and across this country. These individuals work 
difficult jobs that are essential to keeping our state's 
economy running, including serving vital sectors like 
healthcare, food services, the meat-packing industry, and on 
farms and ranches.
    I also want to mention something that the chairperson 
brought up and address that issue. I think it's important that 
we understand that, as this country tries to regain its 
economic footing after this terrible disease, we have a lot of 
Americans who are out of work, a lot of people who have spent 
their lifetime paying taxes and contributing to our country 
that are the fabric of this country. While we have to recognize 
those who are legally in this country who are assisting in 
fighting this terrible disease and I have a great deal of 
respect for those people who are doing that, I also think we 
have to recognize that illegal immigrants have no role, should 
not be in this country, and that we are making a serious 
mistake when we don't allow Americans to fill jobs that are 
being filled now by illegal immigrants.
    We are doing this country a great disservice when we 
continue to see the unemployment rolls swell while this country 
actively promotes sanctuary cities in the large cities and 
policies that undermine the Rule of law and undermine the very 
nature of what this country is about. The idea that Americans 
should stand in line for unemployment checks or welfare checks 
or get other forms of subsistence while those who are in this 
country illegally are working and undermining our economy is a 
sad day.
    I think that this hearing should not only recognize those 
who are here legally who are helping America and helping 
Americans during this very difficult time, I also think it's 
important that we recognize that those who are here illegally 
should leave, that we should take even more swift action to 
make sure that they leave, and that we should make sure that 
our southern border is secure so that we don't allow more 
illegal immigrants to come into this country.
    With that, Madam Chair, I yield back.
    Ms. Lofgren. Thank you very much.
    I understand that Mr. Nadler is not yet present, but I am 
happy to recognize the Ranking Member of the full committee, 
Mr. Jordan, for any opening remarks he may have.
    Mr. Jordan. Thank you, Madam Chair. I don't really have any 
opening remarks. I just want to welcome our witnesses, in 
particular Ms. Navratil, and look forward to hearing her 
testimony.
    I yield back.
    Ms. Lofgren. Very good.
    Then it's now my pleasure to introduce the witnesses, and 
here they are.
    Vicente Reyes is a 20-year-old farmworker, college student, 
and a beneficiary of the Deferred Action for Childhood 
Arrivals. He resides in Bakersfield, California. Since 2010, 
Mr. Reyes has worked alongside his parents harvesting crops--
carrots, beets, oranges, table grapes, onions, lettuce, kale, 
and mustard crops. He, along with his mother and father, are 
currently working the table grape harvest. Vicente is a second-
year student at Bakersfield College and plans to attend the 
California Institute of Technology in the fall of 2020 to 
pursue a career in robotics engineering.
    Just as a point of personal privilege, my husband attended 
Bakersfield College for 2 years before he went off to UCLA, and 
my late father-in-law, Dr. John J. Collins, served as the 
President of Bakersfield College for many years. So, I have a 
tremendous affinity for Bakersfield College. It's a wonderful 
institution.
    We have also Haeyoung Yoon, who is the senior director of 
policy at the National Domestic Workers Alliance. She has spent 
her career advocating for the rights of low-wage and immigrant 
workers, serving as the distinguished Taconic fellow at 
Community Change and in various director-level roles at the 
National Employment Law Project. Ms. Yoon is an experienced 
litigator, having represented low-wage and immigrant workers in 
wage and hour litigation at the Urban Justice Center and 
serving as lead counsel in the civil rights case Iqbal v. 
Ashcroft. She has also taught law courses at the NYU School of 
Law and Brooklyn Law School.
    We also have Tom Jawetz, who is the vice President of 
immigration policy at the Center for American Progress, where 
he oversees the organization's immigration-related research and 
advocacy efforts. Prior to this, Mr. Jawetz served as chief 
counsel for this very Subcommittee and as an attorney for the 
ACLU's National Prison Project. He has also represented asylum 
seekers in judicial and administrative proceedings with the 
Washington Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights and Urban 
Affairs, as well as a law clerk to the Honorable Kimba Wood of 
the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
    Finally, we have Dimple Navratil, who, along with her 
husband, owns a retail store in Racine, Wisconsin, called 
Dimple's Imports. The business imports goods from a variety of 
countries in Asia, Africa, Europe, and Central America but 
specializes in gemstone jewelry made by Ms. Navratil's family 
Members in India. Ms. Navratil is active in the community and 
currently sits on the board of the Racine Zoo, the Downtown 
Racine Corporation, and the Ascension Hospital Foundation.
    We welcome all our witnesses and thank them for 
participating in today's hearing.
    Now, if you would please rise, each one of you, and raise 
your right hand, I will begin by swearing you in.
    Do you swear or affirm, under penalty of perjury, that the 
testimony you are about to give is true and correct to the best 
of your knowledge, information, belief, so help you God?
    The record will reflect that each of the witnesses answered 
in the affirmative.
    Thank you. You may all be seated.
    I will note that each of your written statements will be 
entered into the record in its entirety, and, accordingly, I 
ask that you summarize your testimony in about 5 minutes.
    To help you stay within that timeframe--I don't think any 
of our witnesses are in the hearing room. For those joining 
remotely, there's a timer on your screen to help you keep track 
of time. When you have reached your 5-minute limit, we do ask 
that you stop and summarize and finish so that we can get into 
our opportunity to ask questions.
    So, first, Mr. Reyes, you may begin. You're recognized.

                   TESTIMONY OF VICENTE REYES

    Mr. Reyes. Chairwoman Lofgren, Ranking Member Buck, and 
Members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to 
speak with you today.
    My name is Vicente Reyes. I'm a farmworker, a student, and 
a member of the UFW Foundation. As a second-year student at 
Bakersfield College, I plan my school schedule around my work. 
I need the money to pay for my tuition and to help my parents 
pay the bills. My dream is to pursue a career in robotics 
engineering.
    Although I'm a DACA holder, my parents are undocumented. 
For 10 years, I have worked with them, harvesting table grapes, 
avocados, carrots, onions, tangerines, wheat, kale, lettuce, 
and potatoes in Kern County, California. California is the 
national leading agricultural State and home to the largest 
number of farmworkers.
    My parents migrated from Mexico in 2005. In 2010, we moved 
to Bakersfield, California, where we began to work in the 
fields for the first time in our lives. I was only 12 years old 
when I personally learned about the brutal work and personal 
sacrifice that farm labor requires.
    Before I even finished the eighth grade, I had spent 
several seasons--
    Ms. Garcia. Madam Chair, we've lost connection.
    Madam Chair?
    Madam Chair, we are having technical difficulties.
    They have advised the technical staff.
    Mr. Correa. On behalf of the chair, we're going to recess, 
go vote, and then we will come back and resume this Committee 
hearing. Thank you very much.
    [Recess.]
    Ms. Lofgren. So, let's start over again. We will begin with 
Mr. Reyes.
    If you could turn on your video and begin your testimony 
from the beginning, that would be perfect.
    Mr. Reyes, can you hear us?
    Mr. Reyes. Yes.
    Ms. Lofgren. If you could turn--there you are. If you could 
start your testimony again. It was not heard in the room 
because of a technical difficulty that has now been corrected. 
So, let's start from the top.
    Mr. Reyes, you are to be heard for 5 minutes. You're 
welcome to give your testimony now.

                   TESTIMONY OF VICENTE REYES

    Mr. Reyes. Chairwoman Lofgren, Ranking Member Buck, and 
Members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to 
speak with you today.
    My name is Vicente Reyes. I'm a farmworker, a student, and 
a member of the UFW Foundation. As a second-year student at 
Bakersfield College, I plan my school schedule around my work. 
I need the money to pay for my tuition and to help my parents 
pay the bills. My dream is to pursue a career in robotics 
engineering.
    Although I'm a DACA holder, my parents are undocumented. 
For 10 years, I have worked with them, harvesting table grapes, 
avocados, carrots, onions, tangerines, beets, kale, lettuce, 
and potatoes in Kern County, California. California is the 
Nation's leading agricultural State and home to the largest 
number of farmworkers.
    My parents migrated from Mexico in 2005. In 2010, we moved 
to Bakersfield, California, where we began to work in the 
fields for the first time in our lives. I was only 12 years old 
when I personally learned about the brutal work and personal 
sacrifice that farm labor requires.
    Before I even finished the eighth grade, I had spent 
several seasons harvesting onions. It was hard work. When you 
harvest onions, you are on the hot ground without shade for 
hours and moving down the rows with your hands and knees.
    As a child, I remember hiding when the supervisors would 
drive by. I wanted to help my family financially, but I feared 
that they would identify me as being too young and would kick 
me out of the field.
    If you're wondering why farmworkers bring their children to 
work, it's out of economic necessity. My parents and I have not 
stopped working in the fields despite fearing deportation when 
we hear about ICE raids in agriculture.
    When the pandemic started, we were unable to shelter in 
place because we were designated as essential critical 
infrastructure workers. As essential workers, we wonder how we 
will get to work without being stopped or cited by the police 
because we're driving during the shelter-in-place orders. If 
the Nation is relying on us to work, will our employers provide 
us with protections and benefits if we get sick?
    If our work is essential, would my parents and others be 
protected from detention and deportation? For my parents, this 
fear of deportation compels them to wake up every morning and 
hug us as if it were the last day together.
    At work, being an essential worker has not meant that we 
get protections from COVID. Everything at work runs as if the 
pandemic doesn't exist, even though Kern County has over 30,000 
cases of COVID-19 and nearly 400 people have died from the 
virus. No one in our family or in our crew has received masks, 
special instructions about workplace social distancing or 
sanitation.
    Not once has our employer screened us for symptoms. My 
parents tell me that some workers who arrive at work ill are 
not turned away by the crew boss. I also know that many 
undocumented farmworkers are afraid to test positive for COVID-
19, because it would require them to quarantine at home without 
pay and without benefits to survive.
    I certainly don't feel like an essential employee, and the 
reality in the fields makes us think that picking the crops is 
more important than protecting our lives and health. Employers 
know that we don't speak out because many of us are 
undocumented.
    To feed the Nation, we are exposed to extreme heat, 
pesticides, to the risk of getting COVID-19, and, more 
recently, to the wildfires and air that's unhealthy to breathe. 
We are at the core of the food supply chain, and we're also its 
first responders when extreme weather threatens to devastate 
the harvest. Without our labor, the food supply chain would 
collapse.
    My family are among the 5.5 million essential workers and 
the 11 million people who are undocumented and live in fear 
about our future. Farmworkers and the rest of our Nation's 
undocumented immigrants deserve a path to legalization and 
citizenship that recognizes the essential role that we play in 
this Nation.
    The country is relying on us. We rely on you to recognize 
our contributions and the many ways in which our health, lives, 
and well-being are interconnected.
    Thank you.
    [The statement of Mr. Reyes follows:]
    
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Ms. Lofgren. I want to thank you, Mr. Reyes, for your 
testimony and also for your patience in waiting while Members 
voted.
    Now, we will ask Ms. Yoon to give her 5 minutes of 
testimony.

                   TESTIMONY OF HAEYOUNG YOON

    Ms. Yoon. Chairwoman Lofgren, Ranking Member Buck, and 
Members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to 
testify today.
    My name is Haeyoung Yoon. I'm the senior policy director at 
the National Domestic Workers Alliance. We represent 2.2 
million domestic workers who work as nannies, home care 
workers, and house cleaners in private homes. Over 90 percent 
of domestic workers are women, well over half are women of 
color, and more than a third are immigrants.
    The COVID pandemic has revealed what many of us knew long 
before this pandemic: That our economy is powered by workers 
and that essential workers span many sectors of our economy. 
These essential workers are largely in low-pay service jobs, 
overrepresented by immigrants, and disproportionately women and 
women of color.
    From farmworkers like Vicente to janitors, from domestic 
workers to nurses, it took a pandemic for our Nation to 
recognize their work is essential, and it always has been.
    While their labor makes our lives possible, essential 
workers have been largely invisible and undervalued. Too many 
essential workers are underpaid without benefits. Lack of 
immigration status makes undocumented workers even more 
vulnerable to violations of rights.
    Essential workers are risking their lives every day, and 
that of their family Members, for us. Despite this, many 
immigrants essential workers and their families have been 
excluded from Federal relief.
    Domestic workers have faced enormous hardship during this 
pandemic. While many are primary breadwinners, their pay is too 
low. All domestic workers typically make $12 an hour. Home care 
workers typically earn just over $16,000 annually. Many do not 
have savings to fall back on. During one Zoom meeting, one 
worker held up her phone to show that she had just a few cents 
in her bank account.
    Only one out of five domestic workers have employer-
provided health insurance, and hardly any worker has paid 
leave. Thus, this pandemic has been a crisis of impossible 
choices for domestic workers. They have no choice but to go to 
work or risk eviction and the threat of having no food.
    For months, many workers went without PPE and did not 
receive an increase in pay.
    Take Sandra. She's been a house cleaner and a nanny for the 
past 20 years. She lives in New York City and takes the train 
to work to care for two children. On the train, she covers 
herself as much as she can, because she knows that a train is a 
high-risk area, but she needs to keep working to pay for rent 
and food. She has paid taxes all the years she's been working 
but is excluded from COVID relief because she's undocumented. 
She also has no health insurance.
    Lee is a home care worker in L.A. She worries about losing 
her job because she has no paid sick time, but she has an 85-
year-old mother and children to support. If she does not work, 
she does not get paid, which puts them all at risk. Early in 
the spring, she was exposed to the virus at the assisted living 
facility where she works. Her employer did not give her PPE 
until after the exposure.
    COVID-19 has also underscored the need to invest in the 
care infrastructure. Even before the pandemic, it was projected 
that the home-care sector will need to fill 4.2 million jobs by 
2026, creating more new jobs than any other occupation in our 
economy. By one estimate, nearly 20 million adults need long-
term care, largely due to baby boomers aging. Our Nation's need 
for care is colossal, and care workers will continue to be 
essential into the next decade.
    The work that care workers, other essential workers, and 
immigrant essential workers do is heroic, yet they are not 
treated like heroes. Treating them as heroes means transforming 
low-wage essential jobs into good jobs by paying higher wages 
and benefits and providing a path to citizenship.
    Lack of legal status for immigrant workers hurts all 
workers, because when employers exploit the lack of their legal 
status to abuse immigrant workers, they create a pervasive 
culture of fear in the workplace that chills efforts of all 
workers to enforce their rights and better their working 
conditions. For this reason, legalization of immigrant workers 
must be a central pillar of transforming essential workers' 
jobs into good jobs and to rebuild our economy out of this 
crisis.
    Thank you again for the opportunity to testify. I look 
forward to answering any questions you may have.
    [The statement of Ms. Yoon follows:]
    
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Ms. Lofgren. Thank you very much for that testimony, and, 
also, thank you for your patience while we voted.
    I'll turn now to Tom Jawetz, a face that we've seen over 
the years in our subcommittee.
    Tom, you're welcome to give your testimony now.

                    TESTIMONY OF TOM JAWETZ

    Mr. Jawetz. Thank you. Chairwoman Lofgren, Ranking Member 
Buck, and Members of the subcommittee, thanks so much for 
inviting me to testify today. It's an honor to appear before 
the Subcommittee for which I once worked, although I would 
prefer to be sitting in 2141 this afternoon.
    Still, I recognize that my ability to do my job from the 
safety of my home during this pandemic is a privilege and a 
luxury that many don't have. Over the past 6 months, millions 
of immigrants, like millions of other Americans, have continued 
to go to work at great personal risk to themselves and their 
families.
    Out of the estimated 7 million undocumented immigrants in 
the workforce, CAP estimates that 5 million, nearly three in 
four, are doing jobs deemed essential to the Nation's critical 
infrastructure by DHS's Cybersecurity and International 
Security Agency, or CISA.
    Hundreds of thousands today are on farms and in food-
processing plants, securing the Nation's food supply. More than 
200,000 are in healthcare occupations as doctors, nurses, and 
home health aides, and around that same number are working to 
keep health-care settings safe and open. Undocumented 
immigrants are keeping grocery store shelves stocked, packing 
warehouses, and sanitizing businesses and public spaces.
    When CISA recently recognized the essential contributions 
of care workers, they finally caught up with something every 
parent and employer has understood deeply for months, maybe 
years: Childcare is the backbone of the entire economy. 
Immigrants, including undocumented immigrants, play an outsized 
role in those jobs.
    While the country comes to appreciate the essential work 
immigrants are doing during this pandemic, it's important to 
recognize that this work didn't just become essential, these 
people didn't just start doing this work, and many of these 
jobs didn't just become hazardous to the health and safety of 
workers. This is work and these are workers who have long been 
essential to the functioning of this country and its economy, 
and their work will remain critical to the economic recovery 
ahead.
    That's why it's so important that the HEROES Act would 
extend financial support to all tax filers, as well as free 
coronavirus testing, treatment, and vaccines, regardless of 
immigration status. The bill's automatic extension of work 
authorization to DACA recipients and TPS holders is crucial, as 
these protections are now more vulnerable than ever.
    It's important to the nearly 1 million people who have DACA 
and TPS and to the more than 500,000 U.S. citizen children in 
their households. It is also vital to the country as a whole, 
as more than 550,000 DACA recipients and TPS holders are 
serving their communities as essential workers--people like 
Doris Reina-Landa-verde, a member of SEIU and the National TPS 
Alliance who developed coronavirus symptoms when she was asked 
by her employer, Harvard University, to continue cleaning 
buildings even as it was sending most of its students home to 
prevent the further spread of the virus.
    Of particular importance to today's hearing, the HEROES Act 
would also grant temporary protection from deportation and work 
authorization to undocumented essential workers.
    These HEROES Act provisions should be in any package passed 
by the current Congress, but the next Congress can and must do 
even better. It's clear the next Congress will have to enact a 
comprehensive national recovery package, and for this recovery 
to be sufficiently dynamic and durable, as well as inclusive 
and equitable, it must reach historically marginalized 
communities that have disproportionately been affected by the 
twin public health and economic crises that we are in and 
excluded from past recovery efforts.
    For undocumented immigrants who have long contributed to 
this country in myriad ways, including those now performing 
essential work, as well as their families, such legislation 
must include a path to citizenship.
    The American people get this. Hart Research Associates 
found this summer that, by a three-to-one margin, voters 
support a path to citizenship for undocumented essential 
workers. They support it both because they recognize that these 
workers stepped up for our country when we needed them the most 
and because immigrant workers who were essential in the 
pandemic will also be essential to rebuilding our economy.
    The 10.5 million undocumented immigrants in the country 
today have lived here for an average of 14 years. This is their 
home, where they are raising their families, and it's long past 
time we recognize them as fully woven into the fabric of 
American life.
    Legalization must be a core component of the recovery 
effort also because it will strengthen the economy and expand 
opportunity. My written testimony cites a range of studies 
showing that first legalization and then citizenship will 
increase wages and productivity for all workers, generating 
both additional tax revenue and spending.
    As undocumented immigrants are particularly vulnerable to 
wage theft and other forms of workplace abuse, legalization 
also will create the foundation for a strong and resilient 
labor market for all workers.
    Think back to March and April, when the country first 
became aware of how serious this pandemic was. At the time, 
there was a real sense of common purpose and shared sacrifice. 
People clapped during shift changes at the hospital and put up 
signs in their yards thanking essential workers.
    Six months in, even as the number of new infections and 
deaths each day is so many times greater than in those early 
months, it's hard to feel that same sense of unity. Now we've 
lost more than 200,000 American lives. Our failure to check the 
virus has kept the economy in deep freeze.
    The main lesson of the pandemic, a lesson we learned, then 
forgot, but need to learn once more, is we can only beat it if 
we work together. Just as we must all work together to defeat 
the corona-virus, we have to all work together to rebuild the 
country. A national recovery package that leaves behind 
millions of people, people who have put so much on the line and 
have already lost so much, will come up short of what our 
country and its people need and deserve.
    Thank you so much.
    [The statement of Mr. Jawetz follows:]
    
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Ms. Lofgren. Thank you very much for that testimony and 
your patience.
    Now we will turn to our last witness.
    Ms. Navratil, you are invited to give us your about 5 
minutes of testimony.

                  TESTIMONY OF DIMPLE NAVRATIL

    Ms. Navratil. Thank you, Chairwoman Lofgren and Ranking 
Member Buck, for the opportunity to testify today. My name is 
Dimple Navratil. I appreciate the opportunity to tell my mostly 
happy immigration story.
    I'm originally from India, but I am now a proud citizen of 
the United States. I have made my home in Racine, Wisconsin, a 
beautiful city on the shores of Lake Michigan. I've been 
married to Denis Navratil for 28 years, and, together, we have 
a grown son named Zane.
    Please allow a mother a moment to brag. Zane is a three-
time State champion in tennis. He was an Academic All-American 
in college. He's an accountant and also the fifth-ranked 
pickleball player in the world. He's also humble and a kind 
young man.
    We own a retail store on Main Street in Racine called 
Dimple's. Our business has been in downtown Racine for 21 
years, making us the oldest downtown merchant. We specialize in 
sterling silver jewelry and unique gifts from around the world. 
Also, we have raised roughly $1 million over the years for 
hospitals via jewelry fundraisers.
    On a personal note, I feel blessed for the opportunities 
available for a minority woman from a third-world country. 20-
seven years ago, I started a small business selling jewelry 
from a little folding table at a church festival, to today 
owning a large retail store in Racine. I also feel fully 
accepted by the community and many organizations that I now 
serve as a board member, including the Racine Zoo, the Downtown 
Racine Corporation, and the Ascension Hospital Foundation.
    Our business has grown slowly and steadily over the years, 
and we expected the same this year. Then COVID hit. Our 
business was forced to close, sadly. We had to let go of some 
excellent employees, a first for us. Then our hospital partners 
began canceling our fundraisers, which account for 
approximately half our sales. Suddenly, the survival of our 
business was at stake.
    Our local mayor, Corey Mason, then announced the city would 
award grants to small businesses negatively impacted by COVID. 
We applied for the relief. Though we clearly met the criteria, 
and the city strongly indicated a desire to assist women- and 
minority-owned businesses, we were denied both of the two 
rounds of grants that were funded through HUD and our local 
taxes.
    I did not understand why we were denied the grants. I 
thought that many would consider our award-winning business as 
an anchor in downtown, worthy of efforts to save. We pay our 
taxes on time. We are active in the community. We are located 
in the heart of the business district. Something didn't seem 
right.
    After some persistence, I received a call from Mayor Mason. 
After more questioning, he told me the real reason why we were 
denied the grant. It was because my husband had attended the 
``Open Wisconsin'' rally in Madison that challenged Governor 
Evers' stay-at-home order.
    Mayor Mason admitted as much in a public statement, adding 
that Denis, and I quote, ``willingly jeopardized public health, 
flagrantly violated safety measures, put city residents at 
unnecessary risk, and engaged in reckless behavior at the 
rally.''
    Here is the truth: Denis did attend the rally. Because he 
was concerned about the virus, he wore a mask. He stayed at the 
edge of the crowd and was careful to maintain a safe distance 
from others. All of this has been proven.
    It was there that Denis was approached by a reporter. He 
had two simple points. First, if a liquor store or a Walmart 
can safely serve their customers, why can't we? Second, you can 
be concerned about the damage done by the virus and care about 
the people suffering economically.
    It is also important to stress the nature of this protest. 
Nobody was insulting or throwing objects at the police. No 
buildings were set on fire. No businesses were looted or 
destroyed. There were no arrests. This was an entirely peaceful 
protest. Apparently, our mayor believes he is not constrained 
by a Constitution that I swore allegiance to and that he swore 
to uphold.
    We have decided to fight this injustice, and, as such, I am 
grateful to live in the United States with a Constitution 
designed to protect the rights of citizens from abusive 
officials. I am thankful to have the opportunity to pursue a 
just conclusion through an impartial judicial system. I look 
forward to a resolution that I trust will uphold the cherished 
rights of all Americans.
    Thank you, and I'm happy to answer any questions you may 
have.
    [The statement of Ms. Navratil follows:]
    
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Ms. Lofgren. Thank you very much for your testimony and 
your patience in waiting while the Members voted.
    We will now go to Members of the Subcommittee who have 
questions. Each member has up to 5 minutes to answer their 
questions.
    We will first turn to the gentlelady from Washington, Ms. 
Jayapal, for questions that she may have.
    Ms. Jayapal. Thank you, Chairwoman Lofgren.
    Thank you to all the witnesses for being here today.
    Ms. Navratil, I too am an Indian citizen, and I applaud 
your work and your business for what it has done. Thank you for 
testifying.
    More than 200,000 lives lost in America due to COVID-19 and 
this pandemic that has raged throughout this country, even as 
this President and too many around him have denied even the 
most basic science about mask wearing, social distancing, or 
PPE--200,000 lives lost. Meanwhile, across the border in 
Canada, they're down to zero deaths.
    Of course, essential workers have been most susceptible and 
most affected, because they are actually helping to save us. 
They are essential, and yet we have treated them as expendable, 
not giving them the most basic protections that they need.
    Some have called the economic crisis that we're facing a 
``secession'' due to the deep and disparate impact on women. 
Women's unemployment rate has reached double digits for the 
first time since 1948. The hardest-hit industries--leisure, 
hospitality, education, and even some parts of healthcare--are 
disproportionately non-White and female.
    At the same time, women who have traditionally worked 
outside the house are now being forced to choose between work 
and childcare. Domestic workers and working women have always 
been inextricably linked, and never more so than now. Domestic 
workers have given not only women but families across the 
country the ability to work outside the home.
    So, let me start with you, Ms. Yoon. How has the COVID-19 
pandemic impacted domestic workers, specifically, and the 
people who depend on them?
    Ms. Yoon. Thank you, Congresswoman, for that question.
    So, as soon as the shelter-in-place orders went into effect 
in March, we started a weekly survey of our workers to 
understand how the pandemic was affecting them and their 
families.
    In early April, we found that 72 percent of surveyed 
workers, a lion's share of them being nannies and house 
cleaners, suddenly lost their jobs, while home-care workers 
were overwhelmingly continuing to go to work to care for an 
elderly or person with disabilities.
    The survey also confirmed that 77 percent of workers are 
primary breadwinners. So, with the sudden loss of income, 
domestic workers quickly started to experience food and housing 
insecurity. In early April, 84 percent reported that they were 
uncertain whether they would have enough money to buy food. In 
the following week, 55 percent were unable to pay rent.
    Housing and food insecurity has been one of the most 
pressing concerns for domestic workers throughout the pandemic. 
In our more recent survey in September, 56 percent still 
reported that they could not pay their rent or mortgage.
    Since April, we have seen workers slowly regaining their 
jobs, but they're working less hours, which means they're 
earning less. Domestic workers were experiencing financial 
insecurity even before the pandemic, and, during this crisis, 
the hardship they're experiencing is unspeakable.
    I want to close with this one data, because that has been 
most disconcerting for all of us at the National Domestic 
Workers Alliance, is that domestic workers that we've been 
surveying, that 80 percent of those who are working have earned 
at most $300 per week since the lockdown, right? So that's $300 
at most, $1,200 a month. That is not a wage that can sustain a 
worker and their families.
    Ms. Jayapal. Thank you.
    I have a follow-up question. I'm going to ask you to be 
really brief, because I want to get to Mr. Jawetz as well.
    For domestic workers who are able to continue working, what 
safety precautions exist to ensure that they're able to work 
safely?
    Ms. Yoon. So, I think, earlier on, no one had any PPE, 
right? Domestic workers were already navigating the reality of 
being legally excluded from basic workplace protections like 
health and safety and not having critical workplace benefits 
like health insurance and paid leave. The pandemic really 
thrusted on them a lot more to navigate on their own to protect 
themselves and protect the clients, right? Without the 
assistance from the government.
    So, early on, we heard--
    Ms. Jayapal. Thank you.
    Ms. Yoon. Oh.
    Ms. Jayapal. Thank you. I just want to make sure I get in a 
question I have for Mr. Jawetz, as well, before my time 
expires.
    Mr. Jawetz, the vast majority of domestic workers are 
immigrant women. Would these immigrant women qualify for the 
economic relief under the CARES Act? How do we ensure that they 
get that relief and also that they're acknowledged for the 
critical role they play?
    Mr. Jawetz. Thanks so much, Congresswoman.
    I mean, obviously, if you look at the provisions in the 
bill for the different populations, but, by and large, 
especially looking at undocumented immigrants who are subject 
to these rules, they're carved out of some of the most 
important and most commonly understood benefits, right?
    So, if you're looking at the direct stimulus checks, for 
instance, not only were undocumented immigrants across the 
board carved out from that, but even U.S. citizens who were in 
the families of those individuals were carved out, including 
U.S. citizen children. If you look, for instance, at all the 
unemployment insurance that was expanded, that's going to carve 
out undocumented workers.
    In terms of emergency medical care relief, for the 
provisions that provided direct care access for coronavirus 
testing and treatment and related services, emergency services 
weren't necessarily affected, but the provisions that expanded 
access to make sure everyone had access to care, those were 
carved out as well.
    Ms. Jayapal. Thank you so much, Mr. Jawetz.
    I yield back.
    Ms. Lofgren. The time of the gentlewoman has expired, and 
I'm pleased now to recognize the Ranking Member of the 
subcommittee, the gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Buck.
    Mr. Buck. I thank the Chair. I would like to yield to Mrs. 
Lesko and then be recognized later, if that is acceptable.
    Ms. Lofgren. That's totally acceptable.
    Mrs. Lesko, you are recognized.
    Mrs. Lesko. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
    Thank you for all of you testifying today.
    Ms. Navratil, I have some questions for you.
    In your testimony, you said, ``Our local mayor, Corey 
Mason, announced that the city would award grants to small 
businesses negatively impacted by COVID. We applied for the 
relief. Though we clearly met the criteria and the city 
strongly indicated a desire to assist women- and minority-owned 
businesses, we were denied both of the two rounds of grants 
that were funded through HUD and our local taxes.''
    Then in your testimony later, you said, when you spoke to 
him in person, he admitted that the reason he did it was 
because your husband attended a rally or whatever you want to 
call it, a protest, in Madison to open up back businesses, 
which I find very offensive and obviously not right.
    Do you know, are you aware, is your husband and you and the 
mayor from different political parties?
    Ms. Navratil. Yes, as my husband has been vocally 
conservative on local issues.
    Mrs. Lesko. Thank you.
    Were there protests and riots in Racine, Wisconsin, and the 
surrounding areas after the George Floyd killing?
    Ms. Navratil. Yes, there were protests and limited rioting. 
Our community-oriented policing house was set on fire. To the 
best of my knowledge, there was not an involvement of social 
distancing, and nobody was punished or cited for it.
    Mrs. Lesko. What was the mayor's reaction to those protests 
and riots? Did he approve of them? Did he sign off on them? Did 
he say anything about them?
    Ms. Navratil. From what I believe is that he allowed the 
protests and riots to go on for 2 days and that continued for 2 
weeks. Our city was on the edge, expecting to get worse again.
    Mrs. Lesko. So, basically, the mayor said you guys weren't 
in compliance because supposedly your husband went to this 
protest and was not in compliance and affected the community in 
some way. Yet, you testified that your husband had on a mask, 
was on the outskirts of the people. The mayor had a totally 
different set of rules for these protesters. Is that my 
understanding?
    Ms. Navratil. Yes, ma'am.
    Mrs. Lesko. Well, I find that outrageous, and I'm glad that 
you're pursuing it. I would assume that these grants probably 
came from some type of Federal money, and so I'm glad that 
you're here testifying today. I hope that you are successful, 
and I applaud you for stepping forward.
    Hopefully, you don't get rioters and protesters now at your 
house, like is being threatened in some other areas and with 
Congress Members.
    Now, I'd like to--I have about a minute left, and I have 
some questions for Mr. Jawetz.
    Mr. Jawetz, in your testimony, you advocate for legislation 
to provide legal immigration status to the Nation's illegal 
immigrant population. Do you support precluding aliens who have 
DUI convictions from benefiting from this legalization?
    Mr. Jawetz. I think--well, for starters, let me say thanks 
for the question.
    If we look at the legalizations that have been done in the 
past and proposed in the past, we've seen different eligibility 
criteria that had been created. Last year, we worked very 
closely on the H.R. 6 bill that would provide a path to legal 
status for Dreamers and TPS holders. That bill was very, very 
well-negotiated, passed with strong bipartisan support in the 
past, and it certainly did have eligibility criteria in it.
    Whether you would look at a single DUI as being something 
that disqualifies someone, even when I was on the committee, 
frankly, we looked at that issue, and I think there were a 
number of Members of the Committee itself, frankly, who 
wouldn't have passed that test.
    So, anytime I think you're looking at what the 
qualifications should be for eligibility for a program, we need 
to do that in connection with the totality of the 
circumstances, the person as a whole, think about that in terms 
of what the criminal justice system, more broadly, looks like, 
and I think that's where you find that criteria.
    Mrs. Lesko. So, I think your answer is, yes, depending on 
the circumstances. If they did have a DUI conviction, they 
should benefit from legalization is what I think your answer 
said.
    So, I yield back. My time is up.
    Ms. Lofgren. The gentlelady's time has expired.
    A third vote has been called on the floor, but it will take 
some time. So, I think--let's go through some Members, 
especially the Members that are in the room, as opposed to 
participating virtually, and perhaps, as they are called on, 
they can go vote and come back.
    The gentleman from California, Mr. Correa, is recognized.
    Mr. Correa. Thank you, Chairperson Lofgren, for holding 
this most important hearing.
    Again, here we are again debating the role of immigrants in 
our society and in our Nation, this time, of course, in the 
context of COVID-19. We keep hearing the same story I've heard 
for decades, which is that these jobs should be done by 
Americans.
    Yet, a few months ago, I got a phone call from a 
representative of the poultry industry. That was prompted by 
the ICE raids in the poultry plants in the Deep South. The 
representative said, look, Lou, this is not about salaries. All 
these workers are Members of the United Food and Commercial 
Workers Union; they make good money. The problem is, no locals 
want to take these jobs. As a result, those industries, those 
economies as well, were brought to a standstill.
    A few months later, I visited a local farm here in my 
district to essentially distribute protective equipment and 
gear to local farmworkers. Those farmworkers, I can tell you, 
were also undocumented. I can also tell you they wanted nothing 
to do with us, because they wanted to do their job, stay away 
from society, stay away from the authorities, and move on.
    Then, of course, just a few months ago, I remember walking 
into our local supermarkets: Empty shelves, no foods. For the 
first time in my life, in America, I have to say, I was 
concerned that there wasn't going to be enough food for us. We 
tried not to panic, and we didn't, but the point was clear: 
These workers are essential workers. They are feeding America.
    From the farms to the poultry plants to, of course, our 
hospitals, those essential workers, those nurses are taking 
care of us. So, I find it interesting that we are talking again 
about illegal individuals as opposed to our frontline workers 
in the fight against COVID.
    If I may, in the 2 minutes, 3 minutes that I have, I want 
to ask our witnesses a question. If I can have each one of you 
answer it briefly. Is there a pathway to citizenship? Is there 
a pathway for one of these workers to get a work permit in this 
country today?
    Vicente, is there a legal pathway for your mom and dad to 
get a work permit to continue to work in the fields to feed our 
society, yes or no?
    Mr. Reyes. I don't have the answer right now, but--
    Mr. Correa. Ms. Yoon, can you answer that question?
    Ms. Yoon. Yes. For many of the domestic workers, care 
workers, the vast majority of people who've been in our country 
and working in our economy for decades do not have a real path 
to gain legal status and citizenship.
    Mr. Correa. Ms. Navratil, is there a pathway for these 
individuals, or would you know, yes or no?
    Ms. Navratil. Are you asking me, sir?
    Mr. Correa. Yes. Go ahead. Would you know if there's a 
pathway for these essential workers to get a work permit in the 
U.S.?
    Ms. Navratil. Well, I'm not an expert in that--
    Mr. Correa. Thank you very much.
    Ms. Navratil. Thank you.
    Mr. Correa. In the minute I have, Mr. Jawetz, there was a 
question earlier about a DUI. I think this is an issue really 
talking about judicial discretion. You have judges that make 
decisions whether you should stay in this country or not.
    I'm reminded of the story of our veterans with green cards 
that are deported because there is no judicial discretion in 
our immigration system. You have these immigrants with green 
cards who go off and fight for our country. Then they return 
and they do something that's dumb or, because of their mental 
scars, they do something, and then they're convicted, and 
they're deported.
    Sir, how important is judicial discretion when it comes to 
immigration and the application of immigration law?
    Mr. Jawetz. Yeah, so discretion is actually essential to 
any judicial system, and it's the underpinning of due process 
and, sort of, fundamental fairness in the system.
    In our immigration system, as you pointed out, you can have 
someone who has a green card who's deported for a crime they 
may have been convicted of 20, 30 years earlier that wasn't 
even a deportable offense when they were convicted of it, and 
the judge has nothing they can really do.
    Mr. Correa. I have to tell you that I agree with you. It 
just breaks my heart to know that there are colonies of 
American veterans that are living outside this country, in the 
Philippines, in Mexico, that because of an infraction--they 
could return to the United States to be buried at a national 
cemetery, but they can't get a green card to live in the U.S.
    Madam Chair, I'm out of time. I yield. Thank you very much.
    Ms. Lofgren. Thank you very much.
    The Ranking Member, Mr. Buck, is now recognized for 5 
minutes.
    Mr. Buck. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    I appreciate the gentleman from California talking about 
legal status.
    Ms. Navratil, you undoubtedly have a great perspective on 
legal status in this country. Where were you born?
    Ms. Navratil. I was born in India, sir.
    Mr. Buck. How did you obtain legal status in this country?
    Ms. Navratil. I fell in love with an American citizen.
    Mr. Buck. You did. How did that happen?
    Ms. Navratil. I don't know how to explain that, but--
    Mr. Buck. Okay.
    Let me ask you about your situation with your husband. Is 
he--I take it he didn't burn down an Arby's restaurant in 
Racine?
    Ms. Navratil. No, sir.
    Mr. Buck. Did he spray paint any rude language on public 
buildings in Racine, maybe like city hall?
    Ms. Navratil. No, absolutely not.
    Mr. Buck. How about, did he taunt police officers or in any 
way demeaning to public servants?
    Ms. Navratil. No, sir.
    Mr. Buck. So, in other words, your husband followed the 
law, obeyed the law, and exercised his First amendment rights 
to protest, to express his opinion, to question authority. I 
always see, when I drive by or anywhere close to Boulder, 
Colorado, I see bumper stickers that say, ``Question 
Authority.'' I think that's an American right and sometimes an 
obligation in this country. Your husband did just that, didn't 
he?
    Ms. Navratil. Absolutely, sir.
    Mr. Buck. So, he questioned authority, and the result was 
that he was discriminated against.
    Ms. Navratil. Correct.
    Mr. Buck. How does that make you feel? As a woman of color, 
how does it make you feel that, for being an American, for 
exercising your constitutional rights, you are discriminated 
against?
    Ms. Navratil. Well, we were very upset and sad. We 
considered leaving the city. We considered selling our building 
and moving out. After thinking through it all, we decided that 
we were going to fight this injustice. We have the support of 
all the local citizens, our customers, our friends over here, 
and I don't think we can leave that easy. We are going to 
fight.
    Mr. Buck. Do you remember the oath you took when you became 
a naturalized citizen?
    Ms. Navratil. Yes.
    Mr. Buck. That you would support and defend the 
Constitution, do you remember that part of the oath?
    Ms. Navratil. Yes, sir. I went through it again.
    Mr. Buck. Yeah. Do you feel like you are supporting the 
Constitution by making your case heard around the country?
    Ms. Navratil. Absolutely. It was a very, very difficult 
decision to make, but we couldn't be quiet about this. I wanted 
to make sure nobody else went through the same as we were.
    Mr. Buck. Oh, I'm afraid you're going to be joined by many 
other conservatives. Anybody who questions authority in a town 
that's run by liberal socialists are going to be discriminated 
against. You can guarantee that.
    You might want to make sure that you prepare them. You let 
them know that if they contact the Republican staff at the 
United States House Judiciary Committee, we will be glad to 
help them get their voices heard. Would you help us in that?
    Ms. Navratil. Absolutely. That's why I'm here, to encourage 
people like me to be able to speak out and not be afraid.
    Mr. Buck. Okay.
    Ms. Navratil. Thank you for your support.
    Mr. Buck. The question earlier about pathways to legal 
status--are you aware that if someone is in this country 
illegally, they can leave the country, they can go back to 
their country of origin, and they can go to their U.S. 
consulate, and they can apply for legal status to become--to 
get some type of visa to come into this country legally? Are 
you aware of that process?
    Ms. Navratil. All the process needs to be done legally.
    Mr. Buck. Sure.
    Ms. Navratil. That's right way to do it.
    Mr. Buck. You sacrificed to become a U.S. citizen. You went 
through some hard times to become a U.S. citizen, didn't you?
    Ms. Navratil. Well, to go through the proper channel, you 
have to.
    Mr. Buck. Sure. What do you think about the fairness of 
people who don't sacrifice, who cheat, who break the law, who 
come into this country and flagrantly decide that they don't 
need to play by the rules, that they can just have the benefits 
that they enjoy in this country, while other people are waiting 
in line, trying to do the right thing?
    Ms. Navratil. I don't think that's fair.
    Mr. Buck. Okay.
    I yield back. I thank the lady for her time in this 
hearing. Thank you very much.
    Ms. Lofgren. The gentleman, the Ranking Member, yields 
back.
    We now will turn to Ms. Garcia, the gentlelady from Texas, 
for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Garcia. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for convening 
this very critical Subcommittee hearing to highlight the vital 
economic role that immigrants serve in our country, especially 
amid this COVID-19 pandemic.
    I thank all our witnesses for their powerful testimony 
today by sharing their personal stories.
    The COVID-19 pandemic has laid bare the fundamental role 
that immigrants have long played in key sectors of our economy. 
According to the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, 
prior to the COVID-19 outbreak and the economic recession that 
has followed, immigrants comprised 17 percent of the U.S. labor 
force. Now, as the United States exceeds over 200,000 deaths, 
many such workers are still at risk of their lives and the 
well-being of their families as they report to work in critical 
sectors.
    While we've addressed the critical needs of our vulnerable 
communities when the HEROES Act was passed by the House in May, 
the Senate continues to blatantly stonewall the needs of the 
American people. This is unacceptable.
    As we heard from Mr. Reyes, these essential workers are 
indispensable to a safe and plentiful domestic food supply.
    As we heard from Ms. Yoon, these essential workers also 
clean and sanitize spaces for care for our children, tend to 
the elderly, and play an increasingly large role in agriculture 
and bear the responsibility of taking care of our loved ones.
    As we heard from Mr. Jawetz, the ability to be able to work 
from home amid the pandemic is, quite frankly, a privilege--a 
privilege that many of us have. In fact, for some of us, it's 
even a luxury. Yet, this is not true for many of these people. 
You can't do the work of agriculture work from home. You can't 
care for someone from your home. You can't clean houses from 
your home.
    Take, for example, Bertha Chan (ph), who has two jobs, with 
one being as a janitor at the Pennzoil Building in downtown 
Houston. She cleans offices on four floors in the span of 4 
hours and does not bring home enough money from this job for 
her family. Adding to the pressure, Bertha has been doing this 
with minimal protection, as she is not provided masks and 
worries about the quality of the gloves that she is given. 
Bertha is an immigrant on the front lines of this pandemic to 
ensure that there are clean, sanitized offices for workers to 
go back to, but she worries about her well-being and her 
ability to provide for her family.
    Another example is Gloriabel Gutierrez (ph), who moved to 
the United States 27 years ago from El Salvador in search of a 
better life in this country. She works as a wheelchair 
attendant at the Houston airport and believes that all humans 
are deserving of having the same resources and treatment 
regardless of their immigration status. She feels especially 
strong about this because migrant workers have been at the 
forefront of this pandemic, helping to keep the country running 
during these tough economic and healthcare crises.
    These are just but a few examples, but these examples could 
be so many other immigrants across America.
    So, I want to start with you, Mr. Reyes. First, let me say 
that I picked cotton myself. I've worked on the farm. I had a 
friend that--we would compare notes, and she told me it was 
worse for her because she picked onions. You could never get 
rid of the smell. So, I hope that has not happened to you, 
because I know you said you pick onions.
    Thank you for picking avocados. I've always said that, if 
I'm deserted on an island and I could get one piece of fruit or 
vegetable, it would certainly be an avocado. So, thank you for 
doing that, because certainly the food you put on the table is 
important to all Americans.
    I was, frankly, just shocked to hear you tell me that there 
is absolutely no protective gear given to any of your family or 
any of the workers around you. Is that true, sir? Can you tell 
me what you can do to just protect yourself?
    Mr. Reyes. Yes, there is no gear that's given. All that we 
try to do, on our part, is we take either cloth, shirts, 
bandanas, things we have at our house, and we use that to 
protect ourselves the most that we can. There is no gear that's 
being given to the farmworkers.
    Ms. Garcia. So, what if one of you does start getting sick, 
some of the symptoms--the high fevers, the nausea, the chills--
what happens then?
    Mr. Reyes. We would--I mean, if we don't go to work and 
have to attend the doctor or stay at home, we would either just 
have to ride the wave and try to ration out our food and try to 
minimize waste of money to be able to stay aboard and pay for a 
whole month or more needed if we can't go to work.
    If we can, we will try to go to work and protect ourselves 
and protect others so that we can be producing the food that we 
all eat.
    Ms. Garcia. Well, I think it's shameful that you don't get 
the things that you need.
    Madam Chair, I know I'm out of time. I yield back. Thank 
you.
    Ms. Lofgren. Let's see. We have just 18 minutes left to 
vote on the floor on the third vote. So, Members who need to go 
to the floor to vote should go now, and we will get you when 
you come back.
    Mr. Biggs, if you have already voted, we would be happy to 
recognize you for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Biggs. Thank you, Madam Chair. I've already voted.
    Ms. Lofgren. All right. You are recognized.
    Mr. Biggs. Thank you. I appreciate that.
    So, Ms. Navratil, can you please tell us a little bit about 
the naturalization process that you went through?
    Ms. Navratil. Exactly what would you like to know, sir?
    Mr. Biggs. How long did it take? The process? What did you 
endure?
    Ms. Navratil. At that time--it was such a long time ago. 
Like I said, I've been here in this country 28 years ago, and 
I've been a naturalized citizen for 16 or 17 years. At that 
time, I went through the proper channels. I submitted my paper. 
I had a green card first, and I had to go through my tests.
    Mr. Biggs. How long did it take to go through the process, 
if you recall?
    Ms. Navratil. Oh, my goodness, it's been such a long time. 
I think maybe a year altogether.
    Mr. Biggs. Okay. Good. Thank you. Thanks for sharing that.
    You run a business in Racine called Dimple's. How long have 
you been doing that business?
    Ms. Navratil. I've been in business for about 27 years, but 
I've been in downtown Racine for 21 years.
    Mr. Biggs. How did the COVID virus and the lockdowns and 
the public response as well as the government response to that 
impact your business?
    Ms. Navratil. Well, first, it dropped our sales 100 
percent. After the lockdown lifted, we are back, but, like I 
said, the majority of our business, we do fundraisers at 
hospitals. We are for-profit, but we give a part of our sales 
to the hospitals for our various fundraisers. All of them have 
been canceled. We do our hospital fundraisers in four different 
States, and, so far, none have called us back, and we don't 
know when we will be able to get back.
    Mr. Biggs. So, the grants that were offered to others would 
have been very helpful to you, I'm sure, as you've testified 
previously.
    Ms. Navratil. Extremely, sir. In my 28 years in this 
country, we've worked very hard to be where we are, and we have 
never, ever had a handout. This was the first time I applied 
for a grant, and we were denied. This would've helped us 
tremendously.
    Mr. Biggs. I can't help but express some dismay and some 
certain degree of outrage when the mayor is quoted as saying in 
a statement that it was his duty to ``protect the public health 
of our city's residents. While I certainly support the rights 
of free speech and assembly, I cannot in good conscience send 
scarce city resources to a person or business that willingly 
jeopardized public health.''
    He's referring to your husband, who was on the edge of a 
crowd at a rally that was peaceful, and he wore a mask the 
whole time. That is, I find, pretty weak sauce as a reason to 
deny the grant and to punish you for your husband's 
participation in a peaceful protest where he was actually 
observing the health needs of other Members of the society. 
That's pretty outrageous conduct on the part of the Racine 
mayor.
    I would just--I'm going to close my comments by just noting 
that people who work in this country legally are appreciated. 
That word does not excuse past noncompliance with U.S. 
immigration law, nor does it necessitate--it doesn't obviate a 
path to U.S. citizenship. We respect those who are working 
legally in the United States.
    So many things that are going on in this country would be 
resolved if we would open our economy back up while taking 
appropriate safety precautions. That will allow the economy to 
flourish once again and laid off workers can be rehired. It 
would actually increase wages again. If you recall, the median 
income in this country is now--or, excuse me, pre-COVID was 
$68,000. At the same time, EU is below 40.
    With that, I yield back.
    Ms. Lofgren. The gentleman yields back.
    The gentlelady from Texas, Ms. Jackson Lee, have you 
already voted? If not, we will go to Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. If 
so, we would recognize you now.
    Ms. Jackson Lee?
    Let's go to Ms. Mucarsel-Powell.
    Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Regrouping the focus of our hearing today, we are here to 
discuss the immigrants that are essential to keeping our 
country working during this pandemic.
    I have to say just one quick response to Representative 
Buck here that started with, you know, talking about 
undocumented immigrants. I think immigrants have been living 
here for tens of years, for decades, have been waiting for a 
legal path to citizenship, including our Dreamers.
    So, I would invite Representative Buck to join all of us to 
asking the Senate to pass that Dreamer bill so that, actually, 
the Dreamers that have been living here for years who are 
essential workers can actually have a legal status. Because I 
agree with you.
    So, we know that immigrant workers are the healthcare 
workers that are treating COVID patients. They are farmworkers 
that are putting food on our table. They're teachers that are 
keeping our children learning while they're at home; 
maintenance, sanitation workers that keep our cities livable 
and clean; and so many others that are critical to our 
infrastructure.
    In my State, here in Florida, immigrants make up nearly 30 
percent of our food-sector workforce. In the middle of this 
pandemic, 300,000 immigrants in Florida work in the healthcare 
industry. Florida and our country rely on these essential 
workers. The reality is that many do not have legal status 
because the immigration system makes it impossible for them to 
have legal status.
    We've had multiple hearings about this. They don't want to 
just be here without papers. They want the papers, but the 
Administration, under this President, is making it almost 
impossible. They're not processing asylum requests. They're 
denying TPS, denying passing the DACA bill.
    An estimated 11,600 healthcare workers in the Nation right 
now hold TPS status: 29,000 DACA recipients. In Florida, DACA 
recipients contribute to the economy in over 6,300 jobs that 
are considered essential, including 1,100 healthcare positions. 
These immigrants are people that are working right now to save 
lives. They're keeping our Nation operating during a pandemic.
    People like Camila, who is here in my district, in 
Florida's 26th district. She's a DACA recipient. She came to 
the U.S. with her family when she was 3. She grew up in Miami, 
and she's now about 22. Graduated from FIU and works as a 
medical assistant at Memorial West Hospital. She's working at a 
COVID testing station, where she takes those nasal swab 
samples. So, you can imagine, people like Camila are on the 
front lines of the pandemic, and they're risking their lives to 
keep our country going.
    Instead of working to protect Camila and keep her here in 
her country--because she's just as American as you, Mr. Buck, 
and everyone else--the Trump Administration is trying to 
dismantle DACA, terminate TPS for hundreds of thousands of 
immigrants, including Haitians, Salvadorans, Nicaraguans, and 
so many others that live here in my district.
    We've already lost 200,000 lives because of this pandemic, 
and we owe it to every American to keep our essential workforce 
at levels that are able to handle the virus. We owe it to 
Camila and to countless others who contribute to the fight 
against COVID to provide those protections and provide an 
opportunity to live and work in our communities.
    So, Mr. Jawetz, you know, you discussed that--and we know 
that we have about 550,000 DACA recipients and TPS holders who 
are constantly under threat by the Department of Homeland 
Security. What would be the impact on our ability to fight this 
pandemic if these workers were removed from our country or 
didn't have those work permits to continue working here in the 
United States?
    Mr. Jawetz. Thanks for the question, Congresswoman.
    Yeah, it's a great point. We're not here talking about 
adding additional folks to the workforce when there are tens of 
millions of Americans out of work. These are people who are 
currently contributing. They have been contributing for many, 
many years.
    If you think about what it would look like to take hundreds 
of thousands of workers out of the workforce that play an 
essential role, the amount of turnover cost that businesses 
would encounter, the amount of disruption to their ability to 
provide services, especially when they're trying to make ends 
meet in the first place, you know, the ways in which it would 
essentially disrupt, obviously, their ability to provide for 
their families. It would be massively disruptive to the U.S. 
economy and to so many of these places.
    You've got tens of thousands of DACA recipients right now 
who are serving in healthcare occupations, same as in TPS. When 
you look at what the American Association of Medical Colleges 
said in their brief to the Supreme Court, they said there have 
been years and millions of dollars of investment by medical 
colleges in these individuals, who are going to help close the 
doctor shortage gap that we can anticipate in this country 
going forward.
    So, they're playing an important role. Taking them out of 
the economy makes absolutely no sense. It certainly doesn't 
make us feel like the system is working any more fairly or 
humanely.
    Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Yeah. Mr. Jawetz, why is it so 
important, then, to have these essential workers work here 
freely without having that threat that they may be deported? 
Like Vicente was just mentioning that his father hugs him in 
the morning like it could be the last time that they're 
together.
    Mr. Jawetz. There are a lot of reasons for that.
    So, one of the things that study after study has found is 
that, when individuals who are undocumented get work 
authorization and then when they get citizenship, they do a lot 
of different things. First, when they have work authorization, 
they can get jobs that are better matches to their skills, 
since they're not locked into a particular job and a particular 
employer. Second, you get additional productivity from them.
    Also, with that additional confidence and security in their 
future, they invest in themselves and their communities better, 
right? So, we've seen this from DACA, that when individuals got 
the ability to stay here and got some protection from 
deportation and work authorization, they went to school more, 
they got better jobs, jobs that paid better. They put back into 
the community more fully. They're buying houses, they're buying 
cars. They're already part of our country, but they have the 
ability to more fully invest in their communities and in their 
families.
    Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Thank you.
    I think we have to make it clear that this is not--these 
essential workers are not taking jobs away from our American 
workers that are here, that we also have to provide 
opportunities for them. It's not an either/or question. We can 
do both.
    Ms. Navratil, a quick question for you, as I was listening 
to you trying to remember when you got your papers. Do you 
remember who was President at the time?
    Ms. Navratil. Yes, ma'am. It was President Bush.
    Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Okay. So, we've had Republican 
Presidents that provide that path.
    I'm glad to hear that it only took you a year. I can't tell 
you how many people in my district have been waiting for years 
to become citizens. Same when they've been married to 
Americans, American-born citizens.
    So welcome. I'm sorry to hear that you've had such a 
difficult time. We support people like you, small-business 
owners like you, regardless of political affiliations. I don't 
know why we have to politicize everything in this Committee 
when we're talking about immigration.
    So, I'm glad that it took a year, and I would hope for the 
same for all the immigrants that are asking and waiting, 
waiting for legal status here in this incredible country.
    Thank you.
    Ms. Lofgren. The gentlelady's time has expired.
    I would turn to the gentleman from California, Mr. 
McClintock, for his 5 minutes of questions.
    Mr. McClintock. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
    Two immediate thoughts come to mind from this hearing.
    The first is that if there are many in the majority party 
who don't care enough about this issue to even show up but 
simply are content with phoning it in, how seriously any of us 
should take it.
    I do take it seriously, which brings me to my second point: 
How tone-deaf can you be? Here we are in the middle of the most 
self-destructive panic in history, when millions of people have 
lost their jobs because of government edicts forbidding them to 
work, resulting in massive unemployment, and the majority holds 
a hearing regarding foreign workers, at a time we are facing a 
shrinking pool of jobs that Americans desperately need to 
recover from this government-ordered lockdown. I'm simply left 
with an inexpressible sense of disbelief.
    These lockdowns haven't saved lives. We can see that 
plainly by comparing jurisdictions that locked down with those 
that didn't. Lockdowns have produced overall higher mortality 
rates and much higher unemployment rates than those 
jurisdictions that didn't panic, that stayed open, that coped 
and carried on.
    Just 8 months ago, we were enjoying the greatest economic 
recovery in our lifetimes. Unemployment was at its lowest point 
in 50 years. Unemployment for African Americans, Latino 
Americans, and women was the lowest ever recorded. Median 
income was rising for the first time in a decade and especially 
for blue-collar, working-class Americans.
    Unlike the Obama years, when people were leaving the 
workforce by the millions, in the Trump years they were 
reentering the workforce by the millions. This didn't happen by 
accident. It happened because this Administration produced one 
of the biggest tax cuts in American history and the biggest 
regulatory relief in American history. It turns out, when you 
get out of people's pockets and out of their faces, they can 
succeed and prosper.
    Now, the left loves to talk about essential jobs. Well, let 
me remind them that, if a job is putting food on your table and 
it's putting a roof over your family and is allowing you and 
your family to get ahead, that job is absolutely essential. To 
call such jobs nonessential and such workers as nonessential is 
the very height of leftist, elitist philosophy.
    All the progress that we made was swept away, and yet the 
one constant theme of the left is to destroy the jobs of 
American workers while, in this hearing, they're elevating 
those who have entered our country illegally.
    Don't tell me there are jobs Americans aren't willing to 
do. The question is what employers are willing to pay. They 
don't have to pay a lot if we're pushing American workers aside 
and replacing them with illegal immigration.
    Now, I missed Ms. Navratil's testimony, but I have heard it 
is a warning that every American needs to hear, and it bears 
repeating.
    Ms. Navratil, you obeyed all our laws. You came to America 
with a sincere desire to become an American, to see your 
children succeed and prosper as Americans. You did everything 
our country asked of you to do. You obeyed our laws. You 
respected our sovereignty. Now you're watching millions of 
illegal immigrants cut in front of you.
    I'd like to, for a moment, have you reprise the encounter 
that brought you to this Committee today, because I'm told it 
is a warning that we all need to hear.
    Ms. Navratil. Well, I am in front of the Committee because 
of the injustice that was done by our Racine mayor.
    We have worked very hard to be where we are, and, like I 
said earlier, we didn't take handout. We had jobs; we started a 
business. I started with a small table in front of a church 
selling jewelry. Twenty-eight years later, we have a store. We 
pay our taxes on time. We give back a lot to the community. I'm 
very involved with the community. We've never asked for any 
kind of handouts.
    So, when the mayor denied our grants, it was a slap to our 
face. Now, it's not about the money issue at all. It's about 
the injustice that was done over here and our First amendment 
right that was taken away from us.
    Mr. McClintock. The reason was because your husband had 
exercised his constitutional right of free speech and freedom 
to peaceably assemble.
    Ms. Navratil. Yes, sir. Exactly.
    Mr. McClintock. Well, thank you again for telling your 
story. I think we need to be aware that that is the future of 
every one of us in this dystopian world that we will live in if 
these leftists ever seize control of our government.
    I yield back.
    Ms. Lofgren. The gentleman yields back.
    The gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Neguse, is recognized for 
5 minutes.
    Mr. Neguse. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Chairwoman 
Lofgren, for holding this critical hearing on immigrants on the 
front lines of the COVID-19 pandemic. I want to thank you for 
your leadership.
    Immigrants are part of our communities. They are our family 
Members, our neighbors, our colleagues, and our friends. They 
are overrepresented in nearly every job that has been deemed 
essential during the pandemic.
    While the Trump Administration closed its borders to new 
immigrants, millions of immigrants already here continued to 
work to stop the spread and lessen the virus's impact on our 
economy.
    To my friends on the other side of the aisle who apparently 
are indignant at the notion that these immigrants are part of 
the American fabric of our country, I would say that they are 
working as medical and healthcare workers caring for COVID-19 
patients, putting their and their family's health and safety at 
risk. They are our farmworkers, grocery store workers, meat 
plant workers, and those in delivery, shipping, and trucking 
who are continuing to go into work each and every day to keep 
Americans fed. We should honor their contributions to our 
society.
    Colorado, the great State that I have the honor of 
representing, is, of course, no different. Our immigrant and 
refugee communities have played an instrumental role on the 
front lines of this pandemic as healthcare workers, engineers, 
educators, small-business owners, and essential workers in our 
food supply chain.
    One such person who I'd like to mention is Ashwani 
Upadhyay, a manufacturing engineer who works in an 
international company with an office in my district, in 
Boulder, that has a number of product lines used by the world's 
largest pharmaceutical companies, some of which are working on 
COVID-19 vaccines. His H-1B petition was denied earlier this 
summer until my office intervened and his appeal was granted. 
The loss of him would have resulted in a less successful 
production of those critical product lines and could have 
hindered the development of COVID-19 vaccines.
    I want to talk a bit about the DACA recipients. Ms. 
Mucarsel-Powell articulated, in my view, you know, the central 
vexing problem that faces us as a country. Because no matter 
the industry, in Colorado, DACA recipients have been stepping 
up and contributing at a time when America needs them most. 
They are doing so regardless of the Trump Administration's 
ongoing efforts to end the program.
    So, I'd like to ask you, Ms. Yoon, what would be the 
consequences, in your view, if the many DACA recipients who 
are, for example, providing childcare or those caring for 
elderly, sick, and disabled Americans lost their protections 
literally in the middle of a pandemic?
    Ms. Yoon. Thank you for that question, Congressman.
    I think my co-panelist Tom talked about this, right? That 
DACA recipients are part of our community, just as you said, 
right?
    The loss of work authorization would mean a few different 
things. One is, one, the threat of being removed from this 
country and being separated from their families, from their 
communities. Being part of this economy, it would be really a 
devastating and unspeakable hardship that I think not just the 
DACA recipients but their families, their communities, right?
    So, I want to just kind of bring this conversation back to: 
For all intents and purposes, they're Americans, right? Other 
than a piece of paper. So, we should remember that they've been 
part of our community, our economy all along. They have always 
been part of our community.
    Mr. Neguse. Thank you.
    Ms. Navratil, I just want to clarify one thing. I thank you 
for testifying today.
    Thank you to all the witnesses for testifying.
    I want to make sure it's not your testimony today that you 
believe that the DACA recipients who are working in these 
various different industries should be deported. Is that not--
that's not your testimony.
    Ms. Navratil. That's not my testimony.
    Mr. Neguse. Okay. Thank you. Well, I appreciate, again, 
your testimony today and each of the witnesses', and I just 
want to make sure that I clarified that for the record.
    Because, as Ms. Yoon articulated--and I certainly concur in 
her assessment--these individuals, the DACA recipients who work 
in our communities, who are caring for the elderly, who are 
working in our grocery stores, who are on the front lines of 
fighting for us in this pandemic, they are Americans. They're 
just as American as every single member of this committee.
    Like some of my colleagues, I'm the son of immigrants. My 
parents came to this country as refugees 40 years ago. I am 
very grateful for the opportunities and the freedoms that this 
country has been able to offer me and my family. I just hope 
that we can recognize the contributions that immigrants are 
making each and every day in communities across the country.
    With that, I yield back the balance of my time, Madam 
Chair.
    Ms. Lofgren. The gentleman yields back.
    I turn now to the gentlelady from Texas. Ms. Escobar is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Escobar. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    It is unfortunate that there's not a single Republican 
colleague who chose to wait and stay to the end of this 
hearing, because I was hoping that they would hear my comments.
    This hearing today is about essential workers. It's not 
about PPP. It's not about civil unrest. It's not about 
grievances against immigrants. It's about essential workers.
    The fact of the matter is that immigrants comprise a key 
component of our essential workforce. In agriculture, they make 
up 73 percent of that workforce; 29 percent of manufacturing; 
28 percent of healthcare; 24 percent of healthcare--I'm sorry--
28 percent of healthcare; 20 percent of logistics; 12 percent 
of education.
    I have a question for Ms. Navratil.
    If you were in need of food or healthcare, would it matter 
to you that the individual helping feed you or get you better, 
would it matter to you whether that person is undocumented or 
not?
    Ms. Navratil. No.
    Ms. Escobar. Okay. Thank you so much. I appreciate that 
response.
    Mr. Reyes, your testimony was extremely compelling. I was 
hoping that there would be at least one Republican colleague 
who would wait until the very end of this hearing, because you 
described what it's like to work in the fields alongside 
undocumented immigrants--backbreaking labor. You described 
being on your hands and knees picking those onions so that the 
rest of us would have food on our table.
    What is it like for you to hear a Member of Congress, a 
member of this committee, actually more than one, say that what 
you're doing is taking jobs away from Americans and that you 
should go back, and to hear one of our panelists say that it's 
not fair that you're here? How does that make you feel, Mr. 
Reyes?
    Mr. Reyes. Congresswoman Escobar?
    Ms. Escobar. Yes.
    Mr. Reyes. I feel sad, because we are the ones who bring 
the food to every one of you every day, every week, and 
weekends as well. I think it's very unfair, that being said, 
because if we're taking away jobs, then why doesn't the 
government put homeless people who are able to work and are 
American, why don't they put them to work instead? If we are 
taking away jobs, then why don't they do that?
    Ms. Escobar. Thank you, Mr. Reyes.
    I have to share with the Members of the Subcommittee and 
our panelists that I have met with farmers who, during--this is 
pre-COVID, of course. When I met with them--and this was during 
President Trump's talks about shutting down the border. They 
met with me, and they said that they urgently needed help to 
make sure that the President didn't shut down the border 
because it would essentially shut down our ability to provide 
food--their ability to provide food for the American public.
    When I inquired about their workforce, they all 
acknowledged that they depend on undocumented labor. They 
acknowledged that, even when they have raised wages, they have 
not been able to secure American applicants for these jobs.
    So, the idea that immigrant labor is taking jobs from 
Americans, while possibly true in some sectors, is absolutely 
not true across the board.
    We have to do more for our essential workforce. We should 
be thanking them. They should be receiving hazard pay. They 
should be receiving healthcare. They should be receiving every 
protection under the sun so that we can continue to enjoy the 
food that we have the privilege of enjoying, the healthcare 
that those of us are lucky enough to receive, and all the other 
benefits that we are able to enjoy because of their 
backbreaking work and because they are risking their lives for 
us every single day.
    In fact, if we're going to talk about fairness, that is 
what is unfair, that they don't have access to those 
protections.
    Madam Chair, I yield back.
    Mr. Reyes. Sorry for the interruption. I meant to say 
jobless, not homeless.
    Ms. Lofgren. Okay. That is noted for the record.
    We now go to the other lady from Texas, Ms. Sheila Jackson 
Lee.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thank 
you for holding this important hearing that you're now holding.
    Let me express my appreciation to the witnesses who have 
provided us testimony for this matter.
    Let me ask a question to Mr. Reyes.
    Thank you so very much. I know how hard it was to become 
status by DACA. I have been on this Committee for a period of 
time, where I've introduced over and over again with my 
colleagues' comprehensive immigration reform which would take 
everyone who was seeking to become a citizen and put them in a 
position to access it without fear of deportation.
    So, quickly, when you said you were doing the right thing, 
to a question asked, what would you do if you didn't feel well 
and you had to take, in light of COVID-19--what did you say you 
would do? You would stay in and not work? Is that what you said 
you would do?
    Mr. Reyes. Yes. We would have to essentially try to ration 
out whatever we have as in money, food, so that we can survive 
and be able to go back to work when it's safe.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Were you paid when you were home sick, 
even if you had--were you paid by the employer, the farmer, 
when you were home, when you took the time so that others would 
not be sick?
    Mr. Reyes. There are only certain days that you get for, 
like, sick days, but there's only 3 days. You have to 
accumulate them over a certain amount of hours, and it's really 
hard to get those hours.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. So, it's 3 days.
    Mr. Reyes, in his capacity, could be considered an 
essential worker. Essential workers bring the food supply from 
farm to market. They also clean and sanitize public spaces and 
care for our children. They tend to be elderly sometimes, but 
Mr. Reyes is a young person. They play increasingly larger 
roles in the healthcare of our Nation.
    The COVID-19 has disproportionately impacted our essential 
workers. Now, according to a recent study, 19.8 million 
immigrants are now considered essential workers. They are un-
status.
    So, let me ask a question to Ms. Yoon and Mr. Jawetz. If 
you would take turns, because of my time, you can answer that.
    Here we are trying to confront the disparate impact not 
only on immigrant workers but Latinx and African-Americans, who 
have had a disparate impact of COVID-19. All of them have been 
on the front lines in many different ways.
    Tell us how devastating it is to have such discriminatory 
practices because someone is un-status, one, with relationship 
to having access to healthcare, time off.
    Would you not--you're not doctors, but because of our 
skewed immigration system, meaning that we are not giving 
people the opportunity for asylum or access to citizenship, 
even if undocumented, how we are harming our whole society, 
economically and health-wise.
    Ms. Yoon, would you comment? Then Mr. Jawetz. Thank you.
    Ms. Yoon. Thank you.
    Yeah, I want to share a story that we heard from a home-
care worker in Texas in the early part of our pandemic, where, 
at that point--and this was in March or in early April--where 
the State was only providing PPE to doctors and nurses in the 
hospitals. She was a home-care worker; she was going to work 
caring for an elderly person. She just was heartbroken because 
she absolutely wanted to go and care for this patient. Because, 
for those most vulnerable to the virus, older Americans and 
those with chronic illnesses and disabilities, home-care 
workers have been their only lifeline to the outside world, 
providing the care and services they need, with daily 
activities like bathing and eating. She didn't have a mask, 
right?
    So, that's the challenge that I think that our workers are 
facing as essential workers, is that it was really--she was 
heartbroken because she didn't know what to do, right? She 
wanted to go, but she also wanted to protect the patient she 
was providing support to.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you.
    Mr. Jawetz?
    Mr. Jawetz. Thanks so much.
    Yeah, I think we have to think about our workforce--and, 
yeah, I think it's most clearly with the domestic workforce 
that Haeyoung has talked about--as kind of like infrastructure. 
They're like roads. They're like power lines. They're human 
social infrastructure upon which strong communities, strong 
families, a strong economy is built. If we're not taking care 
of that economy, that workforce the entire thing crumbles.
    I look at the idea about how, starting in January, without 
a doubt, we're going to have to have a national recovery 
package that looks at these twin crises we're facing, the 
public health crisis and the economic devastation that has 
resulted from the failure to actually control this virus. I 
think, if we don't reckon with the fact that there are millions 
upon millions of people who are playing critical roles in 
protecting the country and serving in these jobs that are 
keeping us going--if we don't remove the legal stigma, 
essentially, of being undocumented from these folks and think 
that we're going to somehow build back in a more resilient and 
stable way than we were beforehand, we're fooling ourselves.
    Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate the 
time. I yield back.
    Ms. Lofgren. Thank you very much.
    The gentlelady from Pennsylvania, Ms. Scanlon, is now 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Scanlon. Thank you very much, Chairwoman. I appreciate 
your holding this hearing. My district is at least 10 percent 
foreign-born. So, we have a lot of immigrants, both documented 
and not documented, in my district, and the pandemic has 
certainly hit them hard.
    I just wanted to focus on a couple issues here.
    First off, back in April, under the CARES Act, Congress 
authorized one-time stimulus payments of $1,200 per person, 
with additional $500 bumps for children. There was a big 
section of folks--I think it was 1.2 million families were 
unable to receive those stimulus because one member of the 
household was not a citizen. It didn't matter if that married 
couple had followed the rules and that the husband or wife had 
a green card.
    Is that correct, Mr. Jawetz?
    Mr. Jawetz. So, basically, both people on a joint--both 
heads of the household, if they're filing together on a joint 
tax form, had to have Social Security numbers, essentially. So, 
if one person filing a joint tax form had a Social Security 
number but somebody else had an ITIN that they were filing 
with, that entire family was disqualified. That would include 
the U.S. citizen Social Security number holder who was filing 
as well as any children.
    Ms. Scanlon. So, if you had a husband and wife, that would 
be $2,400 that family didn't get. If they had four kids, that's 
another $2,000. We're talking, by definition, here about a 
family that's filing a tax return and paying taxes and playing 
by the rules, right?
    Mr. Jawetz. Definitionally, they're filing their return. 
Again, so if you have a U.S. citizen married to an undocumented 
spouse, who have two children who are U.S. citizens, that 
entire family is cut out from getting relief.
    Ms. Scanlon. Okay. Some of those people could be in 
process, trying to seek asylum or something else; they just 
haven't gotten through the process yet.
    Mr. Jawetz. They certainly could be. If you've got a Social 
Security number, then that would be the cure to the issue. 
Again, we know that there are millions of undocumented 
immigrants in the country who are contributing, who do every 
year faithfully file tax forms, and they use an ITIN, just like 
the Federal Government allows them to use.
    Ms. Scanlon. Right. So, they're not cheating the system 
here.
    Mr. Jawetz. No. These are folks who are net contributors to 
the country. They've long been net contributors to the country. 
There's basically unified agreement on that among economists.
    Ms. Scanlon. Okay.
    Ms. Yoon, I see that your organization has a chapter in 
Philadelphia, and I represent part of Philadelphia. Do you have 
any particular stories with regard to the Philadelphia area, or 
can I follow up with you about that?
    Ms. Yoon. I'm happy to follow up with you. We have a very 
robust chapter in Philly, so happy to follow up with your 
office.
    Ms. Scanlon. I would appreciate that. I mean, much of your 
testimony really resonated. Philadelphia has an aging 
population, and so when we think of essential workers, we think 
of doctors and nurses and such, but we've got so many folks who 
rely upon home care, care for the disabled, folks in assisted 
living, folks in senior centers.
    You mentioned the growing need for care workers, 
particularly in elder care. Can you elaborate on this and talk 
about the outsized role that immigrants now play in caring for 
our aging population?
    Ms. Yoon. Yes. So, as I noted in my testimony, that from 
2016 into 2060, the population of adults aged 65 or older in 
the country will nearly double, from 49.2 million to over 90 
million people. The number of adults aged 85 or older is 
expected to nearly triple over the same period to 19 million.
    The aging of our Nation means the aging of our workforce. 
It means more workers will be retiring and leaving the 
workforce. As advances in technology and healthcare allow all 
of us to live longer, it is so important that all of us live in 
our homes, amongst our family, amongst our community. We're 
going to need, as a Nation, care workers who are going to 
provide them very basic needs, like helping to get up in the 
morning, helping to bathe, helping them to take medication. 
Right?
    These are critical components of allowing our aging 
populations to live and thrive in their homes and communities.
    Ms. Scanlon. Thank you.
    Mr. Jawetz?
    Mr. Jawetz. Can I add really quickly one thing, 
Congresswoman? To Haeyoung's point, over this current decade 
alone, the National Academy of Sciences found that, but for 
immigrants and their children, we would actually lose 7 million 
people from the working-age population of this country. So, if 
we think that immigrants are playing an essential role today, 
just wait over the next 10 and 20 years.
    Ms. Scanlon. Okay. Thank you.
    I see my time has expired.
    Ms. Lofgren. The gentlelady's time has expired.
    I have waited until the end so I could make sure that all 
the Members had a chance to ask questions, given the votes. 
Given that the votes are over in the House for today, there is 
interest among Members for a second round of questions. So, I 
will begin my first-round questions, and then we will start 
again, for those Members who are able to stay, with our second 
round.
    I'll just say, Mr. Reyes, it was interesting to listen to 
you. Your parents have lived each day with fear that they could 
be picked up by ICE and separated from each other at any time.
    Last year, the House of Representatives passed a bill 
called the Farm Workforce Modernization Act. In addition to 
many reforms relative to the H-2A program, it would've allowed 
farmworkers like you and your parents to get what's called a 
blue card, which would allow you to work legally in the United 
States, and then, after a period of time, give you the option 
to either renew the blue card or apply for legal permanent 
residence.
    If that became law, how would that change your life and the 
life of your family?
    Mr. Reyes. Thank you, Chairwoman Lofgren, so much for your 
leadership and important work in the farm workforce 
legislation.
    For me personally, it would broaden my horizon of education 
and career-wise. I would be able to not just apply for a 
minimum-wage job, but I can now apply to a dream job, such as, 
like, working at NASA or for any Federal job that there is, as 
that is my personal goal, to work for NASA as a robotics 
engineer.
    For my family, it would be such a great relief that they 
can now work in peace. I'm pretty sure that would be true for 
all the undocumented farmworkers, that they can now work at the 
job more peacefully, more safer. They would be able to claim 
their rights that they deserve. As of now, they are afraid to 
claim rights because they're undocumented, and the ones that 
are in charge know that and violate the rights of those 
workers. So, I think, with that legislation, it would let them 
open up about what's actually going on.
    Ms. Lofgren. It's interesting, my husband grew up in 
Bakersfield, and, as a young man, his father was constantly 
pressing him to take jobs in the summer. One summer, his father 
insisted that he take a job picking carrots.
    So, he went out into the field to pick carrots, and he 
spent the whole day picking carrots and earned about a dollar. 
Meanwhile, the farmworkers who knew how to pick carrots had 
picked, you know, 5 times, 10 times as much as he picked. 
Because, although being a farmworker does not require a college 
education, it is not unskilled. What he found out is, you can't 
just walk in and pick enough carrots to actually produce 
anything if you don't know what the heck you're doing, which he 
did not. He didn't last. He was an unsuccessful farmworker.
    So, to think that these are jobs that are going to be 
easily filled is not correct.
    I'll just say, in addition to chairing this subcommittee, I 
used to be an immigration lawyer and I used to teach 
immigration law. We have not really updated our immigration 
laws--it's the same basic structure that was done in 1965. The 
system really isn't serving America well right now.
    I was interested to hear your wonderful story, Ms. 
Navratil, becoming a citizen, how wonderful that was. It 
started me thinking about the M.D.s who we need. We need these 
M.D. scientists. The way we've structured the law is, if a 
scientist who is doing cutting-edge research on COVID-19 was 
born in India, she can't get a visa, but if she was born in 
Germany, she could. That doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
    So, we have structured this in a way that it really doesn't 
serve America. It does not serve America. Because we've got 
essential workers all the way from people who are keeping food 
in the supermarkets so we can eat or doing science research or 
helping sick people because they're physicians, and the way the 
law is written, there's no--in many cases, no way for people to 
legalize their status, to do what you did, and I'm so glad you 
did, to become an American like us.
    So, we need to take a look at how we craft the law so it 
works for the United States, works for our people, works for 
our country.
    With that, I think that my time has expired.
    So, we'll go for our second round of questions. I would 
turn first to the Ranking Member, Mr. Buck, for his questions.
    Mr. Buck. I have nothing at this time. Thank you, 
Chairwoman.
    Ms. Lofgren. All right.
    I don't know, is Pramila still on this call?
    If not, I know Mr. Correa is interested. If Pramila 
returns, we will recognize her.
    Mr. Correa. Thank you, Madam Chair, for indulging me. I do 
have a couple of questions, thoughts.
    I'll start out, Mr. Jawetz, if I can. If a farmworker, a 
nurse, or a poultry worker wants a work permit, can they 
actually leave the country, return to their country of origin, 
and apply for a work permit and return to the U.S.?
    I want to be clear, because I have a lot of casework, 
immigration casework, in my office, and, far as I know, there 
is no real pathway to get a work permit or a green card to this 
country right now. Can you clarify for me what the State of the 
law is?
    Mr. Jawetz. Yeah. Would that it was so simple.
    First, any person who has accrued a year of unlawful 
presence in this country--and, again, remember that I said that 
the average undocumented immigrant of the 10 million that have 
been here have been here for 14 years on average. If you've 
accrued 1 year of unlawful presence, the second you leave the 
country, you're barred for 10 years from coming back. So, this 
idea that you can step foot abroad and then magically come back 
the right way doesn't make any sense.
    Moreover, even if you somehow got that waived and you 
didn't have that, there aren't a lot of pathways that you could 
actually apply for it in an embassy abroad that would then 
allow you to come back. So, if you look at farmworkers, for 
instance, or any sort of, like, the ``other worker category'' 
in immigration law, you're looking at 5,000 or 10,000 immigrant 
visas available per year to people who are applying for those--
    Mr. Correa. So, let me ask you, if somebody is in another 
country--India, Mexico, China, Vietnam, where most of our 
immigrants are coming from--haven't stepped in the U.S., can I 
go to the American embassy in Mexico City and apply to come to 
the U.S. and automatically get a permit to come to the U.S. to 
work?
    Mr. Jawetz. Definitely, not automatically certainly. There 
are different pathways you could try and choose, and so you 
could try and access the H-2A program, you could try to access 
the H-2B program. There are certain pathways that are 
available, but they are so inadequate and so poorly tailored to 
the realistic wants and needs of the country that, ultimately, 
the dysfunction of the system is fundamentally responsible for 
the dysfunction we see in the country today.
    Mr. Correa. I just want to make sure I'm being clear here. 
If I tell my constituents, taxpayers in my district, you can 
leave the country and apply for a permit, then come back, 
that's actually not correct.
    Mr. Jawetz. No. That is dangerous advice to offer them.
    There's one thing I want--
    Mr. Correa. Thank you very--go ahead--thank you very much.
    Let me move on to Ms. Navratil, if I can.
    You mentioned that you married an American citizen. Did you 
meet your spouse in your country of origin, or did you meet him 
in the U.S.?
    Ms. Navratil. In the U.S., sir.
    Mr. Correa. Were you here as a student, or did you have a 
permit to be in the U.S. when you met him?
    Ms. Navratil. I was on a tourist visa.
    Ms. Correa. A tourist visa. You didn't happen to overstay 
on that tourist visa, did you?
    Ms. Navratil. No, sir. I did not.
    Mr. Correa. So, I guess, Chairwoman Lofgren just said 
that--and I agree with her--we have these cutting-edge 
scientists in terms of technology that this country needs to 
stay ahead of the rest of the international competition, and 
they can't stay.
    So, what would you advise those students studying in the 
U.S., doing all this postdoctoral research? Should they get 
married to an American citizen to stay in the U.S.? Or what 
other way can they stay in the U.S.?
    That's a question, ma'am. Ms. Navratil, what would you 
recommend to these hardworking individuals that are busting 
really hard, trying to find the American Dream like you did? 
What would you ask--what advice would you give those people to 
find the American Dream like you did?
    Ms. Navratil. I'm not in a position to give them advice 
like that.
    Mr. Correa. Most people aren't, but what would you tell 
them? Any advice? Find--
    Ms. Navratil. No, sir.
    Mr. Correa. --an American and marry them?
    Ms. Navratil. No, sir.
    Mr. Correa. But, you did it. That's the way you did it. You 
would advise them to do that.
    Ms. Navratil. That was my story.
    Mr. Correa. Thank you.
    Madam Chairperson, I have a few seconds left, but I yield 
the remainder of my time. Thank you very much.
    Ms. Lofgren. The gentleman yields back.
    I know Ms. Jackson Lee has a question. Before I recognize 
Ms. Jackson Lee, I would just note, certainly, Ms. Navratil has 
made it clear that she's not comfortable giving legal advice. 
That's not her expertise, and we respect that.
    Certainly, getting married only to get a visa would not be 
proper. You have to have a real marriage, a valid marriage, to 
meet the requirements of the immigration law. I think we don't 
want to leave any confusion on that point. Obviously, Ms. 
Navratil met the man of her dreams and has a valid marriage.
    So, at this point, Ms. Jackson Lee, I guess, has stepped 
out, so I will call on Ms. Scanlon. If Ms. Jackson Lee returns, 
we will hear from her.
    Ms. Scanlon, you are recognized.
    Ms. Scanlon. I don't have further questions. Thank you.
    Ms. Lofgren. All right.
    Is Ms. Jackson Lee available?
    Seeing not, then I will just conclude with one further set 
of questions.
    Mr. Jawetz, you have indicated that the number--that the 
country has a great dependence on people who are lawfully--
they're here under cover of law. They're DACA recipients; 
they're TPS recipients.
    Are you able to provide a breakdown of how many DACA 
recipients or TPS recipients fit within the essential-worker 
category that the Department of Homeland Security has issued? 
Is there any way to know that?
    Mr. Jawetz. So not directly. What we can do and what a 
small number of research institutions do is look at the 
American Community Survey and make imputations, essentially, 
about immigration status that can identify these folks, you 
know, in the data.
    What we found, in looking for this hearing at the new CISA 
version 4.0 on essential workers, there are actually about 
331,000 DACA recipients and about 219,000 TPS holders who are 
in these essential occupations.
    We're talking about tens of thousands in healthcare jobs, 
people who are supporting the healthcare industry. We're 
talking about a very large share, actually, who are working in 
food-related occupations. If you look at the TPS workforce, for 
instance, very, very substantially related to doing home health 
work and other sort of assistant work in the medical 
profession--nursing assistants and the like.
    Ms. Lofgren. All right.
    So, at this point--that was my last question. I think there 
are no further Members in line to ask questions. Unless I hear 
from them and prove that I'm incorrect, it would be time to 
bring the hearing to a close.
    So, to conclude, I want to thank the witnesses. Really, 
it's been fabulous to hear from each one of you. We do 
appreciate it.
    Without objection, all Members will have 5 legislative days 
to submit additional questions for the witnesses or additional 
material for the record.
    Ms. Lofgren. Without objection, this hearing is now 
adjourned. Thank you very much.
    [Whereupon, at 5:04 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
   

                                APPENDIX

=======================================================================


[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                 [all]