[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 137 (Saturday, September 28, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11696-S11697]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




            CONFERENCE REPORT ON ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION REFORM

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, while I am awaiting the return of the 
distinguished minority whip, I observe that one of the issues that I am 
fixing to bring up is the so-called Gallegly immigration bill. This had 
been a part of the illegal immigration bill that had been passed and 
was in conference between the House and the Senate. It was the 
provision that the President objected to strenuously. And the 
administration and the Democratic leadership indicated that they would 
never allow us to pass the conference report through the Senate that 
contained this Gallegly language.
  This language would allow States, on a prospective basis, if I 
understand it, to not be required to have to provide free education for 
the children of illegal immigrants. There are many States now that have 
a financial burden of being told by the Federal Government, ``We can't 
control our borders, we can't control illegal immigration into this 
country, but in spite of our failure, you have to provide free 
education.''
  In the State of California, I think we are talking about well over 
300,000 children, at a cost to that State of $2 billion for the 
education of the children of illegal immigrants. Should we not allow 
the States to have options here? As I understand it now, any children 
now in the schools could stay until they are through. But in the 
future, illegal aliens would be told they are not going to be able to 
get free education forever for their children in the school system. It 
is a magnet. It draws illegal immigrants into this country to get 
access to this free education system.
  Somebody has to worry about the taxpayers in the State of California 
or Texas or Arizona, or in America. I thought that this was a very 
important part of the illegal immigration legislation. But it was so 
strenuously objected to, and a filibuster was threatened in the Senate. 
The President said he was going to veto it. So it was removed from the 
illegal immigration bill.
  So then we find that the administration found new provisions to 
object to. They, for instance, said that they would take down the 
entire illegal immigration bill and maybe not agree to the omnibus 
appropriations conference report, unless the language in there that was 
removed, which said that we had to accept illegal immigrants, even 
though they were HIV positive, which leads to a cost of well over 
$100,000 and maybe even more, for HIV-positive illegal immigrants. I 
find that inexplicable. Again, it is a magnet. You get an HIV-positive 
problem, what is your solution? Come into America illegally and your 
medical needs will be taken care of by the taxpayers of America. But it 
was so important to the administration, until it threatened to take 
down the entire effort of negotiations on illegal immigration and on 
the continuing resolution.
  I think it is a terrible policy. But again, to try to get an 
agreement, that provision was removed. A lot of effort went into this 
legislation by Senator Simpson, Senator Kennedy, Congressman Berman, 
Congressman Lamar Smith. They felt very strongly about

[[Page S11697]]

the importance of getting this work completed, including the so-called 
title V. The administration indicated they wanted title V taken 
completely out. But once they started reading it and seeing what was in 
it, they realized there were several provisions in there that, in fact, 
they liked or that made good common sense. So in the wee hours this 
morning--it must have been 3 or 4 o'clock--Senator Simpson and others 
were in a room working on this language. Finally, with great 
difficulty, they came to an agreement. Many portions of title V are 
still in there. We still have some very reasonable expectations 
regarding legal immigrants. But the big illegal immigration bill now is 
in the continuing resolution that we will be taking up in the next 
couple of days.

  So the House of Representatives, not able to get the Gallegly 
language included in illegal immigration, have now moved it separately. 
They passed it through the House overwhelmingly, as I understand it. I 
don't recall the vote. So we have it here in the Senate. We ought to 
pass the Gallegly language. I will be asking unanimous consent that we 
proceed to its consideration momentarily.
  I still don't see the Democratic whip back from the Cloakroom. Others 
may wish to speak. I have to wait for his return, so I will yield the 
floor and perhaps the Senator from South Dakota can speak and allow me 
to come back.
  Mr. PRESSLER addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Dakota.

                          ____________________