[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 114 (Tuesday, July 29, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10144-S10145]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. LEAHY (for himself, Mr. Jeffords, Mrs. Feinstein, and Mr. 
        Kennedy):
  S. 1481. A bill to prohibit the application of the trade authorities 
procedures with respect to implementing bills that contain provisions 
regarding the entry of aliens; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Congressional 
Responsibility for Immigration Act, a bill to deny fast-track 
procedures to trade agreements that include immigration provisions. We 
have witnessed outrage in both parties and in both houses of Congress 
to the inclusion of ``temporary entry'' provisions in the Free Trade 
Agreements (``FTAs''), with Chile and Singapore. Members of the House 
and Senate Judiciary Committees, along with other concerned Members, 
have stated clearly that they never again want to see trade agreements 
that include immigration provisions. This bill will allow us to do more 
than rely on the vague assurances that the Office of the U.S. Trade 
Representative has offered in response to our strongly-held concerns--
it will provide a major deterrent that should prevent this 
Administration and future Administrations from ignoring Congress' 
authority over immigration policy. I am pleased that Senator 
Feinstein--who has led the fight against the inclusions of immigration 
provisions in the Chile and Singapore agreements--Senator Jeffords, and 
Senator Kennedy have joined me in introducing this bill.
  This bill is simple and straightforward. It states that whenever the 
Senate considers legislation to implement a free trade agreement, any 
Senator could raise a point of order against the bill on the grounds 
that it includes an immigration provision. If the point of order were 
upheld, the bill would have to be considered under ordinary procedures, 
allowing us to amend it and strike provisions that violated our 
constitutional authority over immigration. Succeeding Administrations 
have told us for decades that they simply cannot pursue trade 
agreements without ``fast-track'' authority, and Congress has chosen to 
give that authority to the Executive Branch. Having surrendered some of 
our power, however, we must be all the more vigilant in ensuring that 
this surrender remains limited in scope.
  It has been widely reported that the USTR considers the ``temporary 
entry'' provisions in the Chile and Singapore agreements to be models 
for future agreements. I have criticized those provisions because I 
share the concerns expressed by Senators Feinstein, Lindsey Graham, 
Sessions and others that the United States Trade Representative should 
not be in the business of amending domestic immigration laws, as these 
treaties do. The decision to include immigration provisions was not 
only unauthorized but also unnecessary to achieve the Administration's 
stated goals. Congress has already created the H-1B program, which 
allows foreign workers with specialized skills to work in the United 
States. That program was established after a lengthy process of public 
hearings, debate, and negotiation, and it has worked to help meet labor 
shortages and strengthen our economy. If the Administration feels that 
the program needs to be changed, or a new visa category created, it 
should have sought to do so through the ordinary legislative process.
  By including immigration provisions in trade agreements, the 
Executive Branch not only usurps Congress' authority to create 
programs, but also to amend them if they prove to be unsuccessful. Any 
amendments that Congress makes to immigration policies that are made 
through trade agreements are subject to challenge as violations of 
those agreements. As a result, our hands are tied not just at the time 
of the negotiation, but for all future legislative activity as well. 
This is simply unacceptable--it was not the purpose of our trade 
agreements and it is neither a wise nor a constitutionally appropriate 
means of creating our immigration policy. We must pass this bill and 
restore our proper separation of powers.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1481

       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 ``Congressional Responsibility 
     for Immigration Act''.

     SEC. 2. LIMITATIONS ON TRADE AUTHORITIES PROCEDURES.

       (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, section 2103(b)(3) of the Bipartisan Trade Promotion 
     Authority Act of 2002 (19 U.S.C. 3803(b)(3)) and the 
     provisions of section 151 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 
     2191) (trade authorities procedures) shall not apply to any 
     bill implementing a trade agreement between the United States 
     and any other country, if the implementing bill contains any 
     provision relating to the immigration laws of the United 
     States or the entry of aliens.
       (b) Point of Order in Senate.--
       (1) In general.--When the Senate is considering an 
     implementing bill, upon a point of order being made by any 
     Senator against any part of the implementing bill that 
     contains material in violation of subsection (a), and the 
     point of order is sustained by the Presiding Officer, the 
     Senate shall cease consideration of the implementing bill 
     under the procedures described in subsection (a).
       (2) Waivers and appeals.--
       (A) Waivers.--Before the Presiding Officer rules on a point 
     of order described in paragraph (1), any Senator may move to 
     waive the point of order and the motion to waive

[[Page S10145]]

     shall not be subject to amendment. A point of order described 
     in paragraph (1) is waived only by the affirmative vote of a 
     majority of the Members of the Senate, duly chosen and sworn.
       (B) Appeals.--After the Presiding Officer rules on a point 
     of order under this paragraph, any Senator may appeal the 
     ruling of the Presiding Officer on the point of order as it 
     applies to some or all of the provisions on which the 
     Presiding Officer ruled. A ruling of the Presiding Officer on 
     a point of order described in paragraph (1) is sustained 
     unless a majority of the Members of the Senate, duly chosen 
     and sworn, vote not to sustain the ruling.
       (C) Debate.--Debate on a motion to waive under subparagraph 
     (A) or on an appeal of the ruling of the Presiding Officer 
     under subparagraph (B) shall be limited to 1 hour. The time 
     shall be equally divided between, and controlled by, the 
     Majority Leader and the Minority Leader of the Senate, or 
     their designees.
                                 ______