[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 137 (Tuesday, October 25, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11824-S11827]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

  By Mr. ENSIGN (for himself, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Byrd, Mr. Specter, Mr. 
Lott, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Inouye, Mr. Levin, and Mr. DeMint):
  S. 1915. A bill to amend the Horse Protection Act to prohibit 
shipping, transporting, moving, delivering, receiving, possessing, 
purchasing, selling, or donation of horses and other equines to be 
slaughtered for human consumption, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
  Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. President, I rise along with my colleagues, Senators 
Landrieu, Byrd, Specter, Lott, Lieberman, Inouye, Levin, and DeMint, in 
order to introduce the Virgie S. Arden American Horse Slaughter 
Prevention Act.
  As a veterinarian, I am well aware of the love that Americans have 
for their horses. Much of our Nation's early history and culture is 
associated with these animals. We think of George Washington's horses 
and the legend of Paul Revere's ride and the Pony Express. More 
recently, we were reminded of how the Depression Era race between 
Seabiscuit and War Admiral

[[Page S11825]]

raised the spirit of our Nation during desperate times.
  While horses in the United States are not raised for food, last year 
alone more than 65,000 horses were slaughtered in the United States for 
human consumption abroad. Tens of thousands more were transported to 
Canada and Mexico for slaughter there. Work horses, race horses, and 
even pet horses, many of them young and healthy, are slaughtered for 
human consumption in Europe and Asia, where the meat is sold as a high-
end delicacy. Polls show that Americans overwhelmingly support an end 
to this practice. This sentiment was reflected in the Senate's recent 
69-28 vote to prohibit the use of Federal funds to facilitate horse 
slaughter. The House of Representatives passed identical legislation by 
a similarly bipartisan vote in June.
  Often, owners who sell their horses at auction are unaware that their 
horses may well be on their way to one of the three remaining 
slaughterhouses in America where horses are killed for human 
consumption. These slaughterhouses are foreign-owned and the product is 
shipped abroad, as are the profits.
  While several States are attempting to address the concerns of 
citizens regarding the tens of thousands of horses going to slaughter 
each year, the absence of Federal law creates a loophole through which 
the slaughter can continue. Some States have prohibited the use of 
double-deck cattle trailers to move horses to slaughter. Texas, which 
is home to two of the three slaughter plants, has had a law in place 
since 1949 to effectively prohibit horse slaughter for human 
consumption. Yet the district attorneys with jurisdiction over the 
plants have been unable to prosecute these foreign companies, and 
horses continue to be slaughtered. To end this situation, we must have 
a Federal law that prohibits sending horses within States, across State 
lines, or over our domestic borders for the purpose of slaughtering 
them for human consumption. We can effectively achieve this goal by 
passing the Virgie S. Arden American Horse Slaughter Prevention Act.
  Congress has the constitutional authority to regulate the horse 
slaughter trade--including intrastate shipment--because such trade has 
a substantial impact on interstate and international commerce. Horses 
are regularly moved across State lines to be slaughtered in the three 
remaining horse slaughter plants--one in Illinois--and the other two in 
Texas. Others are exported across the U.S. border to Canada and Mexico 
for slaughter there. Even the meat of slaughtered horses is eventually 
moved across State lines or our domestic borders for sale outside of 
the United States. Our bill will end this practice.
  I know that some people have expressed concerns about what will 
happen to horses if their slaughter is ended. Many of these horses will 
be sold to a new owner, kept longer by their original owner, or 
euthanized by a licensed veterinarian. Others will be cared for by the 
horse rescue community, and efforts are now underway to standardize 
practices in this ever-growing sector. Guidelines for these rescue 
organizations have been developed by the animal protection community 
and embraced by sanctuaries across the country.
  Some people have questioned whether this law will result in the abuse 
and neglect of unwanted horses. Thankfully, statistics do not support 
this claim at all. Recently released figures show that the number of 
abuse cases dropped significantly in Illinois from 2002 to 2004, the 
period in which the State's only horse slaughtering facility was closed 
due to fire. Also, since California passed a law banning the slaughter 
of horses for human consumption, there has been no discernible increase 
in cruelty and neglect cases in the state.
  Furthermore, it is currently illegal to ``turn out,'' neglect, or 
starve a horse, so this bill will not result in an increased number of 
orphaned horses in the United States. If a person attempts to turn his 
or her horses out, under current law, animal control agents will be 
able to enforce humane laws. As I stated before, this bill seeks only 
to end the slaughter of horses for human consumption. If a person 
wishes to put an animal down, it costs about $225 to have the horse 
euthanized by a licensed veterinarian and disposed of--a fraction of 
what it costs to keep a horse as a companion or a work animal. That 
cost is not too big a burden to bear when no other options are 
available.
  The time for a strong federal law ending this slaughter is now. This 
bill does not target other forms of slaughter, rendering, or 
euthanasia, rather it focuses solely on the slaughter of American 
horses for human consumption. The House version of this bill, H.R. 
5031, currently has more than 120 cosponsors. Please join Senator 
Landrieu and me in cosponsoring the Virgie S. Arden American Horse 
Slaughter Prevention Act.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
                                 ______
                                 
       By Mr. HAGEL:
  S. 1916. A bill to strengthen national security and United States 
borders, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
                                 ______
                                 
       By Mr. HAGEL:
  S. 1917. A bill to require employers to verify the employment 
eligibility of their employees, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on the Judiciary.
                                 ______
                                 
       By Mr. HAGEL:
  S. 1918. A bill to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to 
address the demand for foreign workers; to the Committee on the 
Judiciary.
                                 ______
                                 
       By Mr. HAGEL:
  S. 1919. A bill to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act in order 
to reunify families, to provide for earned adjustment of status, and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. HAGEL. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce my comprehensive 
immigration reform legislation. This legislative package consists of 
four bills that deal with national security, employment security, 
America's workforce, and bringing accountability to those living here 
illegally. This package is an enhanced version of immigration reform 
legislation I introduced in 2004 with former Senate Minority Leader Tom 
Daschle.
  Immigration reform is an urgent national security priority. We cannot 
continue to defer making tough choices about our nation's immigration 
policy. It is not in our interest to have 8 to 12 million people 
undocumented and unaccounted for in our country. The American people 
won't accept immigration reform until they are convinced we are 
controlling our borders. Congress must reform the patchwork of 
immigration laws that have created an underground, black market labor 
force.
  The first bill is the Strengthening America's Security Act of 2005. 
The bill strengthens national security and U.S. borders by assisting 
law enforcement in their efforts to secure our borders. It will 
increase the number of Customs and Border Protection officers; require 
DHS to use updated technology at the border; increase criminal 
penalties for alien smuggling, document fraud, misuse of social 
security numbers, gang violence, and drug trafficking at the border; 
authorize continued funds to reimburse states for the costs of 
detaining undocumented aliens; and give DHS additional tools to detain 
and deport undocumented aliens.
  The second bill, the Employment Verification Act of 2005, requires 
employers to verify the employment eligibility of their employees. The 
bill will assist all employers in their effort to hire legal workers by 
establishing a mandatory electronic worker verification system. The 
system would be managed by DHS in conjunction with the Social Security 
Administration. The system will allow employers to immediately verify 
whether an individual is authorized to work in the U.S. This system is 
already being used by the federal government and by certain employers 
across the country, including some in Nebraska. The system will be 
phased-in over a 5 year period, starting with large employers. The 
legislation includes protections to ensure that the system will not 
result in hiring discrimination based on race or national origin, nor 
will it interfere with the regular hiring process. Employers who use 
the system will receive a ``safe-harbor'' from prosecution for hiring 
unauthorized workers.
  The Strengthening America's Workforce Act of 2005 will amend the 
Immigration and Nationality Act to address

[[Page S11826]]

the demand for foreign workers. The bill will provide foreign workers 
for low-skilled jobs that would otherwise go unfilled by admitting a 
limited number of workers annually through a new temporary worker 
program. Employers seeking to hire foreign workers through this program 
must first demonstrate that no qualified U.S. worker exists and that 
they will provide the same wage levels and working conditions as U.S. 
workers. Workers will be admitted for a limited period of time and will 
be allowed to change employers. Visas are good for 2 years and can be 
renewed. Qualified workers and their families would be provided an 
opportunity to adjust their immigration status over time.
  In order to address the need for high-tech workers and to reduce the 
existing worker visa backlog, this legislation would allow foreign 
students who have earned an advanced degree in science, technology, 
engineering or math from U.S. universities to receive a H-1B work visa 
without leaving the country and without regard to the annual cap of 
65,000. In addition, high-tech workers who have worked in the U.S. for 
three years may be allowed to adjust to permanent resident status 
without regard to the annual cap of 140,000. The spouses and children 
of immigrant workers would also be allowed to adjust status without 
regard to this cap.
  In order to encourage more foreign students to study in the U.S., 
this legislation would give full-time foreign college and graduate 
students the opportunity to work part-time while studying at U.S. 
universities.
  The fourth bill, the Immigrant Accountability Act of 2005, will amend 
the Immigration and Nationality Act in order to encourage those in the 
U.S. illegally to apply for legal status. The legislation would create 
an earned adjustment program for long-term undocumented Immigrants and 
provide an opportunity for illegal aliens and their families to become 
invested stakeholders in the country if they can demonstrate that they 
have met all of the following requirements:
  Passed national security and criminal background checks;
  Resided in the U.S. for at least 5 years preceding the date of 
introduction;
  Worked a minimum of 3 years in the U.S. preceding the date of 
introduction, and 6 years after introduction;
  Paid all Federal and State taxes;
  Registered for Military Selective Service;
  Demonstrated knowledge of English language and American civics 
requirements;
  Paid a $2,000 fine, in addition to required application fees. Fines 
assessed from this program could total as much as $12 billion.
  The legislation would create a program for short-term undocumented 
immigrants who cannot meet the work or residence requirements. They 
will register with DHS and will be allowed to apply for a visa. 
However, these undocumented immigrants must return to their home 
country to obtain the visa and be readmitted through the legal process. 
These undocumented immigrants will have three years to complete the 
application process and will be authorized to work during that time.
  There is a backlog reduction provision in the bill that would exempt 
certain individuals, living outside the U.S., from existing caps on 
family-based immigrant visas. This section was originally included in 
the 2004 Hagel/Daschle Immigration Reform bill.
  The new fines and fees created by this legislation will fund the new 
and expanded programs created in it. Fines assessed by this legislation 
could total as much as $12 billion. A majority of the funds will come 
from the $2000 fine illegal aliens would pay under the Earned 
Adjustment Program.
  This legislation is the product of years of discussions with law 
enforcement, business, labor, and advocacy communities. The bills are a 
serious effort to meet the President's principles for reform with 
commonsense legislation. In March, I visited the Mariposa Nogales Port 
of Entry in Arizona at the U.S.-Mexico border and saw first-hand border 
patrol operations with U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents.
  I understand that immigration reform is a complex and difficult 
issue. In addition to the legislation I have introduced today, there 
are other proposals on the table. The American people won't accept any 
more excuses. Now is the time for us to stop deferring tough decisions 
and take action on this urgent national priority.
                                 ______
                                 
      Mr. OBAMA:
  S. 1920. A bill to amend the Clean Air Act to establish a renewable 
diesel standard, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Environment and Public Works.
  Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, the House of Representatives has passed, 
and the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee is considering, 
legislation to increase petroleum refinery capacity in the United 
States. The argument is that the shortage of domestic refining capacity 
is contributing to the rising price of gasoline which, in turn, is 
squeezing families' pocketbooks and complicating our Nation's economic 
future. The theory is that relaxing environmental regulations will 
unlock long dormant investment in new domestic refining capacity.


 =========================== NOTE =========================== 

  
  On page S11826, October 25, 2005, the following sentence 
appeared: Mr. President, the House of Representatives has passed, 
and the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee is 
considering, legislation to increase petroleum refinery capacity 
in the United States.
  
  The online version has been corrected to read: Mr. OBAMA. Mr. 
President, the House of Representatives has passed, and the Senate 
Environment and Public Works Committee is considering, legislation 
to increase petroleum refinery capacity in the United States.


 ========================= END NOTE ========================= 

  It is incumbent upon industry and the congressional supporters of 
this bill to document that environmental regulation has in fact blocked 
such investment. Testimony has been provided on both sides of that 
proposition.
  What seems to me to be less debatable is that any legislative effort 
to address deficient refining capacity should include the encouragement 
of domestic nonpetroleum refinery infrastructure. If we are serious 
about reducing our country's dependence on imported petroleum and 
insulating our economy from future supply disruption shocks--whether 
from the volatile Middle East or natural disasters such as Katrina--
encouraging the construction of more alternative fuel refineries should 
be part of that strategy. After all, even if we have more petroleum 
refineries, we won't have any more crude oil to process through them, 
unless we import more. That is not what I would define as ``progress.''
  This past summer, Congress passed the Energy Policy Act. As my 
colleagues know, that law includes a bold, bipartisan initiative to 
help wean our Nation from its petroleum dependency: the Renewable Fuels 
Standard, RFS.
  The RFS establishes that the national gasoline supply will consist of 
at least 7.5 billion gallons of homegrown ethanol by the year 2012. The 
RFS also commits the country to the greater use of biodiesel in our 
fuel supply.
  As Congress looks to expand domestic gasoline supply, a far stronger 
signal should be sent that the U.S. Government is serious about growing 
our 40 billion gallons-a-year domestic diesel industry. That's why 
today I am introducing legislation to create a Renewable Diesel 
Standard, with the goal of 2 billion gallons annually of alternative 
and renewable diesels by 2015.
  Petrodiesel is used in a wide variety of transportation modes: 
transit buses; semi trucks; ships; heavy duty construction, farming and 
mining equipment; military vehicles; locomotives; barges; large scale 
generators; farm and mining equipment; and in many people's individual 
cars and trucks. While not as large of a market as gasoline, 
petrodiesel is enormously significant.
  A Renewable Diesel Standard would focus alternative fuel production 
strongly on the world of diesel engine vehicles. And engines that use 
petrodiesel can also use other types of diesel fuels, like biodiesel, 
or Fischer Tropsch diesel, with little or no engine modification.
  This interchangeability helps in time of diesel shortages. It helps 
keep diesel prices competitive. And, as diesel is made from domestic 
feedstocks, it reduces our reliance on foreign crude oil. That is good 
for national security--especially when diesel is the fuel for workhorse 
vehicles like buses, bulldozers, or military equipment that are so 
important in times of emergency.
  In recent months, Illinois farmers have raised concerns with me 
regarding the high cost of diesel fuel. Imagine how biodiesel and 
diesel alternatives could help mitigate fuel costs for farmers who now 
mostly rely on diesel fuel made from foreign oil. Imagine how 
biodiesels or coal diesels could help truckers and other small business 
owners, whose profit margins are so seriously affected by unforeseen 
price spikes in petrodiesel for semi trucks.

[[Page S11827]]

  For my colleagues who have staked out opposing positions in the CAFE 
debate, a Renewable Diesel Standard would, like the RFS, lay the 
groundwork for increasing ``miles per gallon'' per vehicle in terms of 
petroleum usage. And wasn't that the underlying intent of CAFE in the 
first place when it was enacted in 1975--to reduce our use of 
petroleum, especially imported oil and petroleum products?
  This bill does not propose that 10 percent of the national 
petrodiesel pool be strengthened with diesel alternatives. It proposes 
only 1 percent of the national supply.
  That is hardly painful for the petroleum industry. This initiative 
would not in any way dent the oil industry's record-shattering profits. 
It is, however, a bold initiative for those entrepreneurs who know that 
new diesels work and are willing to prove it by investing on a 
commercial scale. They know we can make diesel from soybeans, from 
sunflower seeds, from coal, and even from garbage. Let's give them 
stronger assurance that the United States intends to capitalize on 
their vision, ingenuity, and expertise in the cause of energy 
independence.
  Right now, there is an estimated 180 million gallons of biodiesel 
production capacity in the United States. Fifty-four companies have 
reported their plans to construct dedicated biodiesel plants in the 
near future, but those plans are dependent upon regional and national 
demand prospects.
  Current domestic petroleum demand is estimated to be high enough in 
the coming years that the United States would need to construct a 
400,000 barrel per day petroleum refinery each year to meet market 
projections. Yet no new petroleum refineries have been built in the 
United States in a quarter century. During the same period, however, 
more than 120 refineries have been built for ethanol and biodiesel, 
with more in the works. And the good news is: unlike petroleum 
refineries, our ethanol and biodiesel refineries do not require 
imported oil as raw material to make the finished product.
  Mr. President, hundreds of millions of gallons of diesel are possible 
within the timeline proposed in my legislation, making another small 
but bold step to create jobs in rural America, strengthen our economic 
security, and improve air quality. A Renewable Diesel Standard is the 
right course for the Nation's future. I hope my colleagues will join me 
in cosponsoring this legislation, and I ask their support for swift 
enactment.

                          ____________________