[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 45 (Tuesday, April 11, 2000)]
[House]
[Pages H2036-H2040]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                   VISA WAIVER PERMANENT PROGRAM ACT

  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass 
the bill (H.R. 3767) to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to 
make improvements to, and permanently authorize, the visa waiver pilot 
program under section 217 of such Act, as amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 3767

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Visa Waiver Permanent 
     Program Act''.
                TITLE I--PERMANENT PROGRAM AUTHORIZATION

     SEC. 101. ELIMINATION OF PILOT PROGRAM STATUS.

       (a) In General.--Section 217 of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1187) is amended--
       (1) in the section heading, by striking ``pilot'';
       (2) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in the subsection heading, by striking ``Pilot'';
       (B) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking 
     ``pilot'' both places it appears;
       (C) in paragraph (1), by striking ``pilot program period 
     (as defined in subsection (e))'' and inserting ``program''; 
     and
       (D) in paragraph (2), in the paragraph heading, by striking 
     ``pilot'';
       (3) in subsection (b), in the matter preceding paragraph 
     (1), by striking ``pilot'';
       (4) in subsection (c)--
       (A) in the subsection heading, by striking ``Pilot'';
       (B) in paragraph (1), by striking ``pilot'';
       (C) in paragraph (2)--
       (i) by striking ``subsection (g)'' and inserting 
     ``subsection (f)''; and
       (ii) by striking ``pilot''; and
       (D) in paragraph (3)--
       (i) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking 
     ``(within the pilot program period)'';
       (ii) in subparagraph (A), in the matter preceding clause 
     (i), by striking ``pilot'' both places it appears; and
       (iii) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``pilot'';
       (5) in subsection (e)(1)--
       (A) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking 
     ``pilot''; and
       (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``pilot'';
       (6) by striking subsection (f) and redesignating subsection 
     (g) as subsection (f); and
       (7) in subsection (f) (as so redesignated)--
       (A) in paragraph (1)(A) by striking ``pilot'';
       (B) in paragraph (1)(C), by striking ``pilot'';
       (C) in paragraph (2)(A), by striking ``pilot'' both places 
     it appears;
       (D) in paragraph (3), by striking ``pilot''; and
       (E) in paragraph (4)(A), by striking ``pilot''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Documentation requirements.--Clause (iv) of section 
     212(a)(7)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 
     1182(a)(7)(B)(iv)) is amended--
       (A) in the clause heading, by striking ``pilot''; and
       (B) by striking ``pilot''.
       (2) Table of contents.--The table of contents for the 
     Immigration and Nationality Act is amended, in the item 
     relating to section 217, by striking ``pilot''.
                     TITLE II--PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS

     SEC. 201. EXTENSION OF RECIPROCAL PRIVILEGES.

       Section 217(a)(2)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act 
     (8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(2)(A)) is amended by inserting ``, either 
     on its own or in conjunction with one or more other countries 
     that are described in subparagraph (B) and that have 
     established with it a common area for immigration 
     admissions,'' after ``to extend)''.

     SEC. 202. MACHINE READABLE PASSPORT PROGRAM.

       (a) Requirement on Alien.--Section 217(a) of the 
     Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1187(a)) is 
     amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (3) through (7) as 
     paragraphs (4) through (8), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following:
       ``(3) Machine readable passport.--On and after October 1, 
     2006, the alien at the time of application for admission is 
     in possession of a valid unexpired machine-readable passport 
     that satisfies the internationally accepted standard for 
     machine readability.''.
       (b) Requirement on Country.--Section 217(c)(2)(B) of the 
     Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1187(c)(2)(B)) is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(B) Machine readable passport program.--
       ``(i) In general.--Subject to clause (ii), the government 
     of the country certifies that it issues to its citizens 
     machine-readable passports that satisfy the internationally 
     accepted standard for machine readability.
       ``(ii) Deadline for compliance for certain countries.--In 
     the case of a country designated as a program country under 
     this subsection prior to May 1, 2000, as a condition on the 
     continuation of that designation, the country--

       ``(I) shall certify, not later than October 1, 2000, that 
     it has a program to issue machine-readable passports to its 
     citizens not later than October 1, 2003; and
       ``(II) shall satisfy the requirement of clause (i) not 
     later than October 1, 2003.''.

     SEC. 203. DENIAL OF PROGRAM WAIVER BASED ON GROUND OF 
                   INADMISSIBILITY.

       (a) In General.--Section 217(a) of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1187(a)), as amended by section 
     202, is further amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(9) Automated system check.--The identity of the alien 
     has been checked using an automated electronic database 
     containing information about the inadmissibility of aliens to 
     uncover any grounds on which the alien may be inadmissible to 
     the United States, and no such ground has been found.''.
       (b) Visa Application Sole Method To Dispute Denials of 
     Waiver Based on Ground of Inadmissibility.--Section 217 of 
     the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1187), as 
     amended by section 101(a)(6) of this Act, is further amended 
     by adding at the end the following:
       ``(g) Visa Application Sole Method of Disputing Ground of 
     Inadmissibility Found in Automated System.--In the case of an 
     alien denial a waiver under the program by reason of a ground 
     of inadmissibility uncovered through a written or verbal 
     statement by the alien or a use of an automated electronic 
     database required under subsection (a)(9), the alien may 
     apply for a visa at an appropriate consular office outside 
     the United States. There shall be no other means of 
     administrative or judicial review of such a denial, and no 
     court or person otherwise shall have jurisdiction to consider 
     any claim attacking the validity of such a denial.''.
       (c) Parole Authority.--Section 212(d)(5) of the Immigration 
     and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(5)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``subparagraph (B)'' 
     and inserting ``subparagraph (B) or (C)''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
         ``(C) The Attorney General may not parole into the United 
     States an alien who has applied under section 217 for a 
     waiver of the visa requirement, and has been denied such 
     waiver by reason of a ground of inadmissibility uncovered 
     through a written or verbal statement by the alien or a use 
     of an automated electronic database required under section 
     217(a)(9), unless the Attorney General determines that 
     compelling reasons in the public interest, or compelling 
     health considerations, with respect to that particular alien 
     require that the alien be paroled into the United States.''.

     SEC. 204. EVALUATION OF EFFECT OF COUNTRY'S PARTICIPATION ON 
                   LAW ENFORCEMENT AND SECURITY.

       (a) Initial Designation.--Section 217(c)(2)(C) of the 
     Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1187(c)(2)(C)) is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(C) Law enforcement and security interests.--The Attorney 
     General, in consultation with the Secretary of State--
       ``(i) evaluates the effect that the country's designation 
     would have on the law enforcement and security interests of 
     the United States (including the interest in enforcement of 
     the immigration laws of the United States);
       ``(ii) determines that such interests would not be 
     compromised by the designation of the country; and
       ``(iii) submits a written report to the Committee on the 
     Judiciary of the United States House of Representatives and 
     of the Senate regarding the country's qualification for 
     designation that includes an explanation of such 
     determination.''.
       (b) Continuation of Designation.--Section 217(c) of the 
     Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1187(c)) is amended 
     by adding at the end the following:
       ``(5) Written reports on continuing qualification; 
     designation terminations.--
       ``(A) Periodic evaluations.--
       ``(i) In general.--The Attorney General, in consultation 
     with the Secretary of State, periodically (but not less than 
     once every 5 years)--

       ``(I) shall evaluate the effect of each program country's 
     continued designation on the law enforcement and security 
     interests of the United States (including the interest in

[[Page H2037]]

     enforcement of the immigration laws of the United States);
       ``(II) shall determine whether any such designation ought 
     to be continued or terminated under subsection (d); and
       ``(III) shall submit a written report to the Committee on 
     the Judiciary of the United States House of Representatives 
     and of the Senate regarding the continuation or termination 
     of the country's designation that includes an explanation of 
     such determination and the effects described in subclause 
     (I).

       ``(ii) Effective date.--A termination of the designation of 
     a country under this subparagraph shall take effect on the 
     date determined by the Attorney General, but may not take 
     effect before the end of the 30-day period beginning on the 
     date on which notice of the termination is published in the 
     Federal Register.
       ``(iii) Redesignation.--In the case of a termination under 
     this subparagraph, the Attorney General shall redesignate the 
     country as a program country, without regard to subsection 
     (f) or paragraph (2) or (3), when the Attorney General, in 
     consultation with the Secretary of State, determines that all 
     causes of the termination have been eliminated.
       ``(B) Automatic termination.--
       ``(i) Requirement.--On and after October 1, 2005, the 
     designation of any program country with respect to a report 
     described in subparagraph (A)(i)(III) has not been submitted 
     in accordance with such subparagraph during the preceding 5 
     years shall be considered terminated.
       ``(ii) Effective date.--A termination of the designation of 
     a country under this subparagraph shall take effect on the 
     last day of the 5-year period described in clause (i).
       ``(iii) Redesignation.--In the case of a termination under 
     this subparagraph, the Attorney General shall redesignate the 
     country as a program country, without regard to subsection 
     (f) or paragraph (2) or (3), when the required report is 
     submitted, if the report includes a determination by the 
     Attorney General that the country should continue as a 
     program country.
       ``(C) Emergency termination.--
       ``(i) In general.--In the case of a program country in 
     which an emergency occurs that the Attorney General, in 
     consultation with the Secretary of State, determines 
     threatens the law enforcement or security interests of the 
     United States (including the interest in enforcement of the 
     immigration laws of the United States), the Attorney General 
     shall immediately terminate the designation of the country as 
     a program country.
       ``(ii) Definition.--For purposes of clause (i), the term 
     `emergency' means--

       ``(I) the overthrow of a democratically elected government;
       ``(II) war (including undeclared war, civil war, or other 
     military activity);
       ``(III) disruptive social unrest;
       ``(IV) a severe economic or financial crisis; or
       ``(V) any other extraordinary event that threatens the law 
     enforcement or security interests of the United States 
     (including the interest in enforcement of the immigration 
     laws of the United States).

       ``(iii) Redesignation.--The Attorney General may 
     redesignate the country as a program country, without regard 
     to subsection (f) or paragraph (2) or (3), when the Attorney 
     General determines that--

       ``(I) at least 6 months have elapsed since the effective 
     date of the termination;
       ``(II) the emergency that caused the termination has ended; 
     and
       ``(III) the average number of refusals of nonimmigrant 
     visitor visas for nationals of that country during the period 
     of termination under this subparagraph was less than 3.0 
     percent of the total number of nonimmigrant visitor visas for 
     nationals of that country which were granted or refused 
     during such period.

       ``(D) Treatment of nationals after termination.--For 
     purposes of this paragraph--
       ``(i) nationals of a country whose designation is 
     terminated under subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) shall remain 
     eligible for a waiver under subsection (a) until the 
     effective date of such termination; and
       ``(ii) a waiver under this section that is provided to such 
     a national for a period described in subsection (a)(1) shall 
     not, by such a designation termination, be deemed to have 
     been rescinded or otherwise rendered invalid, if the waiver 
     is granted prior to such termination.''.

     SEC. 205. USE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS.

       (a) In General.--Section 217 of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1187), as amended by section 
     203(b), is further amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(h) Use of Information Technology Systems.--
       ``(1) Automated entry-exit control system.--
       ``(A) System.--Not later than October 1, 2001, the Attorney 
     General shall develop and implement a fully automated entry 
     and exit control system that will collect a record of arrival 
     and departure for every alien who arrives by sea or air at a 
     port of entry into the United States and is provided a waiver 
     under the program.
       ``(B) Requirements.--The system under subparagraph (A) 
     shall satisfy the following requirements:
       ``(i) Data collection by carriers.--Not later than October 
     1, 2001, the records of arrival and departure described in 
     subparagraph (A) shall be based, to the maximum extent 
     practicable, on passenger data collected and electronically 
     transmitted to the automated entry and exit control system by 
     each carrier that has an agreement under subsection (a)(4).
       ``(ii) Data provision by carriers.--Not later than October 
     1, 2002, no waiver may be provided under this section to an 
     alien arriving by sea or air at a port of entry into the 
     United States on a carrier unless the carrier is 
     electronically transmitting to the automated entry and exit 
     control system passenger data determined by the Attorney 
     General to be sufficient to permit the Attorney General to 
     carry out this paragraph.
       ``(iii) Calculation.--The system shall contain sufficient 
     data to permit the Attorney General to calculate, for each 
     program country and each fiscal year, the portion of 
     nationals of that country who are described in subparagraph 
     (A) and for whom no record of departure exists, expressed as 
     a percentage of the total number of such nationals who are so 
     described.
       ``(C) Reporting.--
       ``(i) Percentage of nationals lacking departure record.--
     Not later than January 30 of each year (beginning with the 
     year 2003), the Attorney General shall submit a written 
     report to the Committee on the Judiciary of the United States 
     House of Representatives and of the Senate containing the 
     calculation described in subparagraph (B)(iii) for each 
     program country for the previous fiscal year.
       ``(ii) System effectiveness.--Not later than October 1, 
     2004, the Attorney General shall submit a written report to 
     the Committee on the Judiciary of the United States House of 
     Representatives and of the Senate containing the following:

       ``(I) The conclusions of the Attorney General regarding the 
     effectiveness of the automated entry and exit control system 
     to be developed and implemented under this paragraph.
       ``(II) The recommendations of the Attorney General 
     regarding the use of the calculation described in 
     subparagraph (B)(iii) as a basis for evaluating whether to 
     terminate or continue the designation of a country as a 
     program country.

       ``(2) Automated data sharing system.--
       ``(A) System.--The Attorney General and the Secretary of 
     State shall develop and implement an automated data sharing 
     system that will permit them to share data in electronic form 
     from their respective records systems regarding the 
     admissibility of aliens who are nationals of a program 
     country.
       ``(B) Requirements.--The system under subparagraph (A) 
     shall satisfy the following requirements:
       ``(i) Supplying information to immigration officers 
     conducting inspections at ports of entry.--Not later than 
     October 1, 2002, the system shall enable immigration officers 
     conducting inspections at ports of entry under section 235 to 
     obtain from the system, with respect to aliens seeking a 
     waiver under the program--

       ``(I) any photograph of the alien that may be contained in 
     the records of the Department of State or the Service; and
       ``(II) information on whether the alien has ever been 
     determined to be ineligible to receive a visa or ineligible 
     to be admitted to the United States.

       ``(ii) Supplying photographs of inadmissible aliens.--The 
     system shall permit the Attorney General electronically to 
     obtain any photograph contained in the records of the 
     Secretary of State pertaining to an alien who is a national 
     of a program country and has been determined to be ineligible 
     to receive a visa.
       ``(iii) Maintaining records on applications for 
     admission.--The system shall maintain, for a minimum of 10 
     years, information about each application for admission made 
     by an alien seeking a waiver under the program, including the 
     following:

       ``(I) The name of each immigration officer conducting the 
     inspection of the alien at the port of entry.
       ``(II) Any information described in clause (i) that is 
     obtained from the system by any such officer.
       ``(III) The results of the application.''.

       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 217(e)(1) of the 
     Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1187(e)(1)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (2) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting ``, and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(D) to collect, provide, and share passenger data as 
     required under subsection (h)(1)(B).''.

     SEC. 206. CONDITIONS FOR VISA REFUSAL ELIGIBILITY.

       Section 217(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 
     U.S.C. 1187(c)), as amended by section 204(b) of this Act, is 
     further amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(6) Computation of visa refusal rates.--For purposes of 
     determining the eligibility of a country to be designated as 
     a program country, the calculation of visa refusal rates 
     shall not include any visa refusals which incorporate any 
     procedures based on, or are otherwise based on, race, sex, 
     sexual orientation, or disability, unless otherwise 
     specifically authorized by law or regulation.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Pease). Pursuant to the rule, the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith) and the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. 
Jackson-Lee) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith).

[[Page H2038]]

                             General Leave

  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all 
Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend 
their remarks, and to include extraneous material on H.R. 3767, the 
bill under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the Visa Waiver Pilot Program allows aliens traveling 
from certain designated countries to come to the United States as 
temporary visitors for business or pleasure without having to obtain 
the nonimmigrant visa normally required. The program authorizes the 
Attorney General to waive the ``B'' visa requirement for traveling 
aliens coming from those certain countries that have qualified. There 
are currently 29 countries participating in this program.
  Since its initial enactment as a temporary program in 1986, the Visa 
Waiver Pilot Program, often referred to as the VWPP, has been regularly 
extended by Congress. The current legislation expires on April 30. 
Fourteen years is a long time for a pilot program. It is time to make 
the VWPP permanent. H.R. 3767, the Visa Waiver Permanent Program Act, 
will make the visa waiver program permanent, more secure, and end the 
need to permanently reauthorize the program.
  H.R. 3767 is a bipartisan bill. It was passed unanimously by the 
Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims and the Committee on the 
Judiciary. The tourism and travel industry strongly supports this 
legislation. Visa-free travel under the program has increased tourism 
in the United States from participating countries. More than 17 million 
visitors enter the United States under the visa waiver program each 
year. A permanent program will be a long-term benefit to the tourism 
industry and remove the uncertainty caused by the periodic expiration 
of the program.
  While a permanent visa waiver program would be good for the American 
travel industry, a permanent program should not be authorized if the 
program posed a threat to the safety and well-being of the United 
States or exposed our country to situations in which large numbers of 
aliens could use the program to circumvent our immigration laws.
  The current requirement that participating countries have a machine 
readable passport has been strengthened by establishing a date certain 
for all countries in the program to implement such a machine readable 
passport. Some countries that have been in the program for nearly 10 
years still have not introduced the machine readable passport they 
committed to develop as a condition of their entry into the program. 
Setting a deadline that is firm is reasonable and fair.
  H.R. 3767 also addresses what has been a major concern about the visa 
waiver program, the inability of the INS to monitor overstays by visa 
waiver travelers. Because the INS has failed to establish a credible 
system for calculating or estimating overstay rates, the only mechanism 
in the current statute for monitoring the compliance of countries in 
the program does not work. Thus, there has been a concern that once a 
country entered the program, it would be in forever, even if conditions 
in the country deteriorated and nationals of the country began to abuse 
the program.
  H.R. 3767 requires the INS to develop a fully automated system for 
tracking the entry and departure of visa waiver travelers entering by 
air and sea, which is approximately 98 percent of all visa waiver pilot 
program travelers. Such a system could easily build on existing 
technology used to develop the advanced passenger information system, 
which INS has developed in cooperation with the airlines. Once the 
automated tracking system is in place, the information it produces can 
be used to calculate overstay rates and visas.
  H.R. 3767 also establishes procedures for periodic reviews of 
countries already in the program and for dealing with emergency 
situations should they arise. Such procedures are an absolute necessity 
to ensure a permanent visa waiver program does not pose a threat to the 
law enforcement and security interests of the United States.
  Once again, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this 
permanent program of the visa waiver and, to make sure that we have a 
good program, we need to include the provisions that I have mentioned.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend her remarks.)
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be an original 
cosponsor of the Visa Waiver Permanent Program Act. I want to commend 
the subcommittee chairman, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith) and his 
staff for working with me and my staff to make the appropriate changes 
that will encourage and expand tourism to the United States while at 
the same time protecting our Nation and its citizens.
  The Visa Waiver Pilot Program was created by Congress to allow short-
term visitors to travel to the United States without having to obtain a 
visitor visa, thereby encouraging and facilitating international 
tourism to the United States. This program is not only about 
immigration, it is about jobs and trade. International tourism to the 
U.S. in 1999 resulted in 47 million visitors, $95 billion in 
expenditures, and produced 1 million direct U.S. jobs.
  The positive economic impact of this bill can be seen in my home 
State and in my district. Texas ranks fourth in the Nation in overall 
visitor spending and also ranks fourth in the Nation for having the 
greatest number of visitors who included an historical place or event 
on their trip. Nearly 19 million visitors traveled to the greater 
Houston area in 1997; and in 1996, visitors spent just under $5 
billion, which resulted in 85,000 tourism-related jobs in the area. 
Many of those include our international travelers.
  I also feel it is very important to remind my colleagues that as home 
to NASA's Johnson Space Center, Six Flags AstroWorld, the world's first 
domed stadium, and now Enron Field, we hope Texas, along with every 
other State in the Union, will continue to draw international visitors. 
I am confident that I have the support of the subcommittee chairman on 
that statement, being that he is from Texas.
  It is time to take the pilot out of this program. H.R. 3767 makes 
this program permanent. A permanent program will give our international 
program participants the certainty and continuity they deserve. The 
State Department, the Travel Industry Association of America, and the 
National Governors' Association all support a permanent visa waiver 
program.
  In the full committee markup, I was able to add language that would 
substitute the word terminate wherever the word rescind appears. This 
would make the loss of the visa waiver privilege prospective from the 
date on which the termination goes into effect. The bill also provides 
any national who is in the United States when the privilege is 
terminated would be permitted to remain lawfully until the end of the 
period for which he or she was admitted. This would be less disruptive 
to the individual who actually came into this country legally and 
something occurred that would intervene and cause their nation not to 
be part of the program anymore.
  Another unintended consequence could occur if the provisions for 
reinstatement of the visa privilege are not modified. If renewal of the 
privilege is sought after it has been taken away for cause, H.R. 3767 
would require the country to meet the same standards that have to be 
met for an initial grant of the privilege. This includes showing that 
the average number of refusals for nonimmigrant visitor visas for the 
previous two fiscal years was less than 3 percent of the total number 
of visas that was requested for that period.
  A country that has just had the visa waiver privilege taken away 
would not have a record of visa requests to base such a statistic on. 
Its nationals would have been entering the United States without visas 
pursuant to the privilege. Consequently, such a country would not be 
able to satisfy this requirement for at least 2 years.

[[Page H2039]]

  This bill authorizes the Attorney General to redesignate the country 
when 6 months has elapsed since the effective date of the termination, 
the emergency that caused the termination has ended, and the average 
number of refusals of nonimmigrant visitor visas for nationals of that 
country during the termination period was less than 3.0 percent of the 
total number of nonimmigrant visitor visas for the nationals of that 
country which were granted or refused during such period.
  H.R. 3767 also provides that the designation of any country shall be 
considered terminated if a report on whether the privilege should be 
continued is not submitted every 5 years. The bill would require the 
Attorney General to reinstate the country when the required report is 
submitted. Of course, this would only apply if the report concludes 
that the country should continue as a program country.
  In committee, Mr. Speaker, we had a very, very strong and vigorous 
debate about the various conditions for admission to the visa waiver 
program. No more than 3 percent of a country's applications for U.S. 
nonimmigrant visas can be refused. Currently, no countries in the 
Caribbean or Africa meet this threshold. I am troubled by this reality 
and will continue to work with the State Department and my colleagues, 
including the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Watt), to remedy this 
problem. We must still study why all the applicants for the visa waiver 
program in Africa and the Caribbean are being refused.
  The bill now prohibits the inclusion of any visa denied by the 
Department of State on certain other criteria such as race, sex, sexual 
orientation or disability when calculating the visa refusal rate to 
determine a country's eligibility.
  The committee report language notes that it would be a violation of 
deeply-rooted American principles of equality of treatment and fair 
play to make determinations regarding visa eligibility based upon 
existing discriminatory criteria. We need to fix that.
  Lastly, I am also very pleased to learn that an emerging and 
increasingly important trading partner, South Africa, already complies 
with one of the new provisions H.R. 3767 has in it, in that the country 
already issues machine readable passports to its citizens. As recently 
as 4 years ago, South Africa had a visa refusal rate of less than 3 
percent.

                              {time}  1330

  I would like to encourage the Department of State and the INS, 
through its Interagency Working Group, to consider South Africa as a 
possible candidate in the near future, I might add, in the very near 
future.
  Interest into the Visa Waiver Program could help in attracting many 
more visitors from that great nation, and we should look at the 
concerns I have with respect to other developing world countries. And 
it would help to demonstrate our commitment to be a strong trade 
partner and a friend of South Africa.
  In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, as we work through this legislation to 
fix other aspects of it, I urge Members to support H.R. 3767 in order 
to make the Visa Waiver Pilot Program permanent.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be an original co-sponsor of H.R. 3767, 
the Visa Waiver Permanent Program Act. I want to commend Subcommittee 
Chairman Smith and his staff for working with me and my staff to make 
the appropriate changes that will encourage and expand tourism to the 
United States while at the same time protecting our nation and its 
citizens.
  The Visa Waiver Pilot Program was created by Congress to allow short-
term visitors to travel to the U.S. without having to obtain a visitor 
visa, thereby encouraging and facilitating international tourism to the 
United States. This program is not only about immigration, it is about 
jobs and trade. International tourism to the U.S. in 1999 resulted in 
47 million visitors, $95 billion in expenditures, and produced 1 
million direct U.S. jobs.
  The positive economic impact of this bill can be seen in my home 
state and in my district. Texas ranks 4th in the nation in overall 
visitor spending, and also ranks 4th in the nation for having the 
greatest number of visitors who included a historical place or cultural 
event on their trip. Nearly 19 million visitors traveled to the Greater 
Houston area in 1997, and in 1996 visitors spent just under $5 billion, 
which resulted in 85,000 tourism-related jobs in the area. I also feel 
it is very important to remind my colleagues that as home to NASA's 
Johnson Space Center, Six flags Astro World, and the world's first 
domed stadium--Houston and Texas--will continue to be a strong draw for 
international visitors. I am confident that I have Chairman Smith's 
support on this statement.
  It is time to take the ``pilot'' out of this program. H.R. 3767 makes 
this program permanent. A permanent program will give our international 
program participants the certainty and continuity they deserve. The 
State Department, the Travel Industry Association of America, and the 
National Governors' Association, all support a permanent Visa Waiver 
Program.
  In the Full Committee mark-up I was able to add language that would 
substitute the word ``terminate'' wherever the word ``rescind'' 
appears. This would make the loss of the visa waiver privilege 
prospective from the date on which the termination goes into effect. 
The bill also provides that any national who is in the United States 
when the privilege is terminated would be permitted to remain lawfully 
until the end of the period for which he or she was admitted.
  Another unintended consequence could occur if the provisions for 
reinstatement of the visa waiver privilege are not modified. If renewal 
of the privilege is sought after it has been taken away for cause, H.R. 
3767 would require the country to meet the same standards that have to 
be met for an initial grant of the privilege. This includes showing 
that the average number of refusals for nonimmigrant visitor visas for 
the previous two fiscal years was less than 3% of the total number of 
visas that were requested for that period. A country that has just had 
the visa waiver privilege taken away would not have a record of visa 
requests to base such a statistic on. Its nationals would have been 
entering the United States without visas pursuant to the privilege. 
Consequently, such a country would not be able to satisfy this 
requirement for at least two years.
  This bill authorizes the Attorney General to redesignate the country 
when six months have elapsed since the effective date of the 
termination; the emergency that caused the termination has ended; and 
the average number of refusals of nonimmigrant visitor visas for 
nationals of that country during the termination period was less than 
3.0% of the total number of nonimmigrant visitor visas for nationals of 
that country which were granted or refused during such period.
  H.R. 3767 also provides that the designation of any country shall be 
considered terminated if a report on whether the privilege should be 
continued is not submitted every five years. The bill would require the 
Attorney General to reinstate the country when the required report is 
submitted. Of course, this would only apply if the report concludes 
that the country should continue as a program country.
  In committee, Mr. Speaker, we had a heavy debate about the various 
conditions for admission to the visa waiver program. No more than 3% of 
a country's applications for U.S. non-immigrant visas can be refused. 
Currently, no countries in the Caribbean or Africa meet this threshold. 
I am troubled by this reality, and will continue to work with the 
Department of State to try to remedy this problem. We must still study 
why all the applicants for the visa waiver program in Africa and the 
Caribbean are being refused. The bill now prohibits the inclusion of 
any visa denied by the Department of State on the basis of race, sex, 
sexual orientation or disability--when calculating the visa refusal 
rate for determining the eligibility of a country for the waiver 
program. The Committee report language notes that it would be a 
violation of deeply-rooted American principles of equality of treatment 
and fair play to make determinations regarding visa eligibility based 
on discriminatory criteria.
  Lastly, I am also very pleased to learn that an emerging and 
increasingly important trading partner, South Africa, already complies 
with one of the new provisions in H.R. 3767, in that the country 
already issues machine readable passports to its citizens. As recently 
as four years ago, South Africa had a visa refusal rate of less than 
3%, and I would like to encourage the Department of State and the INS, 
through its Inter-Agency Working Group, to consider South Africa as a 
possible candidate in the near future. Entrance into the Visa Waiver 
Program could help in attracting many more visitors from that great 
nation, and would help to demonstrate our commitment to be a strong 
trade partner and friend.
  In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to support H.R. 3767 in 
order to make the Visa Waiver Pilot Program permanent.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I have no other speakers, and I 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the 
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Watt).
  Mr. WATT of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for 
yielding me the time.
  Mr. Speaker, let me say up front that I intend to vote for this bill. 
I voted for

[[Page H2040]]

it in the committee, and I will vote for it on the floor.
  The notion of having a Visa Waiver Program is a good and honorable 
notion that I think all of us support. But I think we would be less 
than fair with our colleagues if we did not say up front that the 
criteria which is currently being used for countries to get into the 
Visa Waiver Program are not the right criteria.
  Right now we are letting countries into the Visa Waiver Program based 
on the visa refusal rate that countries have experienced. And, 
unfortunately, there are a number of instances where that refusal rate 
is colored by considerations that ought not go into the evaluation: the 
race of applicants, the economic status of applicants, various biases 
that people who are considering whether to grant a visa or not are 
being taken into account. This is not the correct criteria.
  The criteria which should be being used is whether people who come to 
our country overstay their visa authority in our country. We are trying 
to move to a system that evaluates that, and we do not have that system 
in place.
  Now, the gentleman from Texas (Chairman Smith) said 14 years is a 
long time to have a pilot program. The reason we have had a pilot 
program for 14 years is we have been working on this system, the valid 
reliable system that we ought to be using to determine whether 
countries are included in the Visa Waiver Program, for 14 years; and we 
still do not have the system in place.
  The problem that I have with calling this a permanent program is that 
we, in effect, then are sanctioning the process or impliedly 
sanctioning the process of considering visa denials, which then 
sanctions the biases that are in that whole denial and approval 
process. And that is troubling to me.
  So while I will support this bill, it is with the express 
understanding that we are moving to a system of evaluating visa 
overstays which ought to be the criteria for determining whether a 
country gets into this program or not, not some arbitrary race bias or 
economic bias or other biased process that quite often is the basis for 
refusing a visa in a source country in the first place.
  That having been said, this is a program that is worthwhile. We hope 
we get the criteria right at some point, and I do encourage my 
colleagues to vote for the program even though I still have 
reservations about the criteria that we will be using on a short-term 
basis.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I simply say that I associate myself with the comments 
of the distinguished gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Watt) and 
acknowledge that we must continue to work through these issues that 
play into the discriminatory aspects of the law.
  I would hope that, as we have cleared up discrimination in the United 
States with legislation and not cleared it up in totality but cleared 
it up with at least a statement of being in opposition to 
discrimination on race, sex, sexual orientation, disability, that we 
would find the ability to do so and carry through on this issue of 
visas.
  I would hope that we will continue the discussion on this legislation 
and, as well, that we will see the implementation of this program as a 
permanent program to be of value economically to the United States as 
well as to increase the very positive relations that we have with many 
of those nations who are on this visa list.
  I would see us improving relations even more with our friends in the 
Caribbean, with our friends in Africa, and our friends additionally in 
South America and other parts who have not had this privilege if we can 
make determinations on overstays along with the issues of refusal 
rates.
  With that, I would ask my colleagues to support this legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I just want to acknowledge the legitimate point made by 
our colleague, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Watt), a minute 
ago. We do, in fact, need a better program to determine the visa 
overstay rates.
  Mr. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support the travel and 
tourism industry and to support legislation to make permanent the Visa 
Waiver Pilot Program. I am fortunate to represent one of the most 
popular tourist destinations in the country, Orlando, Florida. Over 38 
million people visit the Orlando area each year, creating a total 
economic impact of more than $17 billion. Nearly 3 million of these 
visitors are from overseas, coming to Florida from Western Europe, 
South America and the Far East. Those visitors are essential to the 
local economy and well-being of the state of Florida.
  Travel and tourism is one of the nation's top three industries 
providing jobs spanning across our communities, from employees at theme 
parks, museums, airlines, car rental companies, food service and 
hotels. The Visa Waiver program, which encourages international travel 
to the United States by waiving the visitor visa requirements for 29 
countries, has added to the growth in overseas tourism. Frequent 
reauthorization of the pilot program creates confusion for those who 
work in the tourism industry and for individual travelers. H.R. 3767 
makes this critical program permanent and also adds security 
enhancements that will make the program even more secure. Passage of 
this bill is a win-win for Congress and makes winners of the millions 
of constituents who work in the travel and tourism industry.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Pease). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith) that the House suspend 
the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 3767, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________