[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 162 (Friday, December 16, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H11940-H11959]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
BORDER PROTECTION, ANTITERRORISM, AND ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION CONTROL ACT
OF 2005
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Upton). Pursuant to House Resolution 621
and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration of
the bill, H.R. 4437.
{time} 1512
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration of
the bill (H.R. 4437) to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to
strengthen enforcement of the immigration laws, to enhance border
security, and for other purposes, with Mrs. Emerson (Acting Chairman)
in the Chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. When the Committee of the Whole rose on Thursday
December 15, 2005, amendment No. 12 printed in part B of House Report
109-347 by the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) had been disposed
of.
Pursuant to House Resolution 621, no further general debate is in
order and remaining proceedings pursuant to House Resolution 610 are
subsumed by House Resolution 621.
Pursuant to House Resolution 621, no further amendment is in order
except those printed in House Report 109-350. Each further amendment
may be offered only in the order printed in the report, by a Member
designated in the report, shall be considered read, shall be debatable
for the time specified in the report, equally divided and controlled by
the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and
shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question.
Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Goodlatte
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 1 printed in House Report 109-350 offered by
Mr. Goodlatte:
At the end of the bill, add the following new title:
TITLE IX--SECURITY AND FAIRNESS ENHANCEMENT
SEC. 901. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as--
(1) the ``Security and Fairness Enhancement for America Act
of 2005''; or
(2) the ``SAFE for America Act''.
SEC. 902. ELIMINATION OF DIVERSITY IMMIGRANT PROGRAM.
(a) Worldwide Level of Diversity Immigrants.--Section 201
of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1151) is
amended--
[[Page H11941]]
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by inserting ``and'' at the end of paragraph (1);
(B) by striking ``; and'' at the end of paragraph (2) and
inserting a period; and
(C) by striking paragraph (3); and
(2) by striking subsection (e).
(b) Allocation of Diversity Immigrant Visas.--Section 203
of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1153) is amended--
(1) by striking subsection (c);
(2) in subsection (d), by striking ``(a), (b), or (c),''
and inserting ``(a) or (b),'';
(3) in subsection (e), by striking paragraph (2) and
redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (2);
(4) in subsection (f), by striking ``(a), (b), or (c)'' and
inserting ``(a) or (b)''; and
(5) in subsection (g), by striking ``(a), (b), and (c)''
and inserting ``(a) and (b)''.
(c) Procedure for Granting Immigrant Status.--Section 204
of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1154) is amended--
(1) by striking subsection (a)(1)(I); and
(2) in subsection (e), by striking ``(a), (b), or (c)'' and
inserting ``(a) or (b)''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect on October 1, 2006.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 621, the gentleman
from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr.
Conyers) each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. GOODLATTE. Madam Chairman, I yield myself 1\1/2\ minutes.
Madam Chairman, each year, the United States Government chooses the
names of 50,000 people who will be given the status of legal permanent
resident, not based on family or employer sponsorship nor based on any
rationale reason, but based only pure luck through a random lottery. My
amendment would eliminate the controversial visa lottery program. The
visa lottery program presents a serious national security threat.
A perfect example of the system gone awry is the case of Hesham
Mohamed Hadayet, the Egyptian national who killed two and wounded three
during a shooting spree at Los Angeles International Airport in July of
2002. He was allowed to apply for legal permanent resident status in
1997 because of his wife's status as a visa lottery winner.
{time} 1515
The State Department's Inspector General has even testified before
Congress this year that the Office of Inspector General continues to
believe that the Diversity Visa Program contains significant risks to
national security from hostile intelligence officers, criminals and
terrorists attempting to use the program for entry into the United
States as permanent residents.
Do not gamble with national security. Join me in eliminating the visa
lottery program.
Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. Madam Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes. I ask that the
House carefully consider this amendment because it may in one respect
represent a not-so-subtle attempt to dismantle the only program that
guarantees that at least 4 percent of the new immigrants have a chance
to come to this country from under-represented nations.
The Diversity Visa Program is the chance for many people of color
around the world to immigrate to the United States and pursue the same
American dream that many of the ancestors of the Members here were able
to pursue.
There is no time in our Nation's history when race and ethnicity were
not primary factors. So what we are asking here is that just as many
great Americans have come to this country as refugees, I have no doubt
that many great Americans have and are coming through the diversity
program. You need only to look at the promise of young Freddie Adu, the
teenage boy who is the newest star on the National Soccer League and
the youngest professional player in the United States. He has got great
promise, and but for his entry to the United States on the Diversity
Visa Program, that promise might not have been realized.
I urge my colleagues to consider this amendment carefully. I hope
that it will be turned back. Let us not dismantle an important and
valuable program.
Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GOODLATTE. Madam Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), the chairman of the Committee on the
Judiciary.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Chairman, I rise in support of this
amendment. I wanted to make a couple of points.
First of all, the visa lottery system has been susceptible to fraud.
Doing away with it would do away with fraud. Secondly, the visa lottery
system does not give visas to people from ``over-represented
countries,'' and that includes Mexico. So no Mexican is eligible to get
a visa on the visa lottery system. I think that is discriminatory.
Also, the visa lottery system is unfair because the winners go ahead
of spouses and children of lawful permanent residents, including
Mexicans, and married sons and daughters of citizens who have waited
for visas, in some instances for years. It also is used as a potential
for aliens who pose a danger to Americans.
I think that with all these problems in the visa lottery system, the
best thing to do is pass this amendment and get rid of it.
Mr. CONYERS. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Chairman, the problem about fraud in this program is that
people apply multiple times when the rules only allow one application a
year per person. In some cases, multiple applications are the result of
people trying to cheat the system; but in other cases, people may apply
not understanding that, unlike many other lotteries, multiple
applications are not allowed and do not really improve your chances.
The State Department has already addressed this in several ways. This
program, I want to emphasize to the membership, is extremely valuable
for those countries that have so very few people coming in under the
regular system, and I would not want us to take this out of the present
law. It is working well. We have had many success stories, and we think
that there is not a serious history of fraud in the program.
Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman
yield?
Mr. CONYERS. I yield to the gentlewoman from California.
Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Madam Chairman, I would just note,
according to the State Department Visa Bulletin for next month, really
this is primarily numerically the greatest number of individuals who
benefit are from the continent of Africa. And because of immigration
patterns, this is an important element of an opportunity for the
American dream for would-be Americans who are coming from the continent
of Africa. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. CONYERS. Reclaiming my time, I appreciate the gentlewoman's
remarks.
Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GOODLATTE. Madam Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman
from South Dakota (Ms. Herseth). This bipartisan amendment is based
upon legislation introduced by myself and the gentlewoman.
Ms. HERSETH. Madam Chairman, I rise today in strong support of this
important amendment to eliminate the Diversity Visa Program, otherwise
known as the visa lottery. I thank my good friend, the gentleman from
Virginia, for the time.
Chairman Goodlatte and Chairman Sensenbrenner have effectively
outlined the serious security risk posed by the visa lottery program
and the flaws in the administration of the program, so I will not
repeat them at this time. But I would like to address a question raised
by some of my colleagues: whether it would be possible to reallocate
the visas currently utilized by the visa lottery program and add them
to the family-sponsored and employer-based categories.
Although the amendment we are offering today does not reallocate the
diversity visas, I am committed to working with Chairman Goodlatte and
our colleagues in the Senate to do just that.
I believe strongly that the elimination of the visa lottery program
will strengthen our national security, that our amendment is an
appropriate and necessary step towards resolution of this issue. I
believe strongly that if our
[[Page H11942]]
amendment passes today, we can negotiate a compromise that will ensure
reallocation of some or all of the immigrant visas available under this
outdated and problematic program which has deviated from its original
purpose.
I encourage my colleagues to join me in voting in favor of this
amendment.
Mr. CONYERS. Madam Chairman, how much time remains on both sides?
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) has 1
minute remaining. The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte) has 2
minutes remaining.
Mr. CONYERS. Madam Chairman, as we have the right to close, I will
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GOODLATTE. Madam Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Smith).
Mr. SMITH of Texas. Madam Chairman, I want to thank Chairman
Goodlatte and Ms. Herseth for offering this amendment to eliminate the
Diversity Visa Program. This program discriminates against people from
Mexico and six other countries. It is susceptible to rampant fraud. It
allows 50,000 people to enter the country whether or not they have
family ties or needed skills and is unfair to immigrants who play by
the rules.
Immigrant visas are usually issued to foreign nationals who have
connections to U.S. employers or family members lawfully residing in
the United States. Under the visa lottery program, though, visas are
awarded to immigrants at random without meeting any of these criteria.
Most family-sponsored immigrants currently face a wait of years to
obtain visas. Yet the lottery program pushes 50,000 randomly picked
immigrants ahead of those who are sponsored by family and employers.
Madam Chairman, we should not have an immigration program that
violates the principles of common sense, fairness and non-
discrimination.
Mr. CONYERS. Madam Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman
from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Let me make a simple statement. This is
legal immigration; that is what we are trying to promote here in this
Congress. The State Department has already testified that this program
is a program that is improved, and it works internationally to bring in
our developing nations as friends of the United States.
Mr. CONYERS. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GOODLATTE. Madam Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman
from Virginia (Mr. Boucher), another of the bipartisan supporters of
this legislation.
Mr. BOUCHER. Madam Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me
time. I rise in support of his amendment.
The visa lottery is an affront both to logic and to the effective
functioning of the visa system. Based upon nothing other than pure
luck, 50,000 permanent resident visas are annually awarded. Lottery
winners are admitted ahead of deserving family members who have played
by the rules and endured long waits. It is a flawed system. The time to
end it has come. I support the Goodlatte amendment which would end this
system. I urge its adoption by the House.
Mr. GOODLATTE. Madam Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman
from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) to close the debate.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Madam Chairman, certainly there is a better way to
engender diversity. We could perhaps reallocate these visas to the
families of those who have won the lottery previously who have become
good citizens.
But the point is, does America want to have a lottery to get the
best, the most skilled people from around the world or the most diverse
people from around the world? And I think not.
It has been subject to fraud. My office every day deals with people
whose families have been waiting 5, 6, 7, 8 years patiently in line
around the world to come here from the Philippines, from Mexico, from
India and other countries. Should they get bumped to the back while
some random person comes first? I think not.
Mr. CONYERS. Madam Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
This amendment, I think, has been mischaracterized seriously. To
allow 4 percent of new immigrants to have a chance to come to the
country from under-represented nations is a way of addressing the
imbalance that I do not think anybody would disagree with that exists
in the immigration patterns, whether they are accidental or purposeful.
There has been no time when race and ethnicity were not primary
factors in immigration policy. Please, I think this is a very important
provision. The Diversity Visa Program should be sustained, and I hope
that the amendment will be turned away.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte).
The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote, and
pending that, I make the point of order that a quorum is not present.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte)
will be postponed.
The point of no quorum is considered withdrawn.
Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Filner
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 2 printed in House Report 109-350 offered by
Mr. Filner:
Section 1546(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended
in the first paragraph by inserting ``distributes (or intends
to distribute),'' before ``or falsely'' the first place it
appears.
Section 1546(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended
in the first paragraph by inserting ``distributed,'' before
``or falsely'' the second place it appears.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 621, the gentleman from
California (Mr. Filner) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
Mr. FILNER. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Chairman, I appreciate the majority's acceptance of this
amendment for discussion. I did have other amendments which I thought
were more important and more helpful to this bill. For example, in this
bill, in section 607, we compensate various local law enforcement
agencies of border counties, of which I represent two, for detaining,
housing and transporting undocumented persons. The biggest problem for
the counties on the border is the emergency health care providers who
are not reimbursed for treatment of undocumenteds.
{time} 1530
My amendment, introduced in the House as H.R. 2934, is called
``PayUp,'' Pay for All Your Undocumented Procedures. It authorizes the
Federal Government to make payment to emergency ambulance and medical
services for the cost of uncompensated care of undocumented persons
that come to their facility aided by the Border Patrol or any other
Federal immigration agency. Unfortunately, that amendment was not
accepted for discussion.
Another amendment would have allowed children in Mexico who have
serious medical problems, for example birth defects, to come across the
border as they did before 9/11 with 1-day visas for emergency
treatment. For the 40 years before 9/11, we were able to give lives
back to about 125,000 young children, poor children who were treated in
my city of Calexico at the Valley Orthopedic Center. After 9/11, these
1-day visas were prohibited. That would have helped not only our
relationship between our two countries but allowed our medical
technology to help poor and young people who are living in Mexico. That
amendment was not accepted.
What was accepted is a technical correction that I will briefly
explain, because the bill in most respects takes a wrong approach
toward our illegal immigration problem.
In this case, instead of making it a criminal act to sell and
distribute fraudulent documents, the bill targets those who are trying
to stay in the United States. My amendment fixes this fundamental
problem by making the distribution or intent to distribute false, fake,
or counterfeit immigration documents as much of a crime as creating or
using them. Let us be clear.
[[Page H11943]]
We are talking about the sale and distribution of illegal documents. I
represent the whole California-Mexico border. There is an industry
dedicated to the counterfeiting and distribution of these documents.
These are the people we ought to go after, and these are the people
who, because of a loophole in the bill, are exempted. We have arrested
people in San Diego for distributing false documents, but there is a
loophole which allows them to escape that charge.
This is a crime that we ought to be going after. The current
government statutes that deal with fraudulent documents completely
ignore the distribution of passports, visas, and other permits, which,
in my opinion, is the true crime. We should go after the real criminals
who are profiting by the sale and distribution of these documents. It
is a simple correction of the law that will strengthen penalties. While
we might disagree about broader immigration policy, we all agree that
the selling of fake and fraudulent and illegal documents should be
stopped. I urge the adoption of this amendment.
Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Chairman, I rise to claim the time in
opposition, even though I am not against the amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mrs. Emerson). Without objection, the gentleman
is recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment which adds
distribution of fraudulent immigration documents to the list of
criminal offenses.
Document fraud is a serious offense that enables our immigration laws
to be violated and creates a national security threat. Controlling the
production and distribution of false immigration documents is a
critical component to effective immigration reform. Currently, the
criminal code provides stiff penalties for those who forge,
counterfeit, or alter visas, border-crossing cards, or other similar
types of documents.
However, the statute does not currently mention distribution of
fraudulent documents among the enumerated offenses. This amendment
would help prosecutors go after those who are not necessarily producing
the fake documents, but those who are making them available on the
black market. Those who distribute or sell false documents deserve the
same harsh penalties as those who forge or counterfeit the documents. I
urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
Madam Chairman, since I have the right to close, I reserve the
balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will not have the right to close
since he is not opposed to the amendment.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. FILNER. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Chairman, I thank the chairman for accepting this amendment and
for his common sense approach to this issue. I hope that you will look
at the two other common sense amendments I mentioned when you get to
conference. Not allowing children to cross for emergency medical
procedures makes no sense at all. These are not terrorists; these are
young children. We are giving them back their futures, and we ought to
change the law to allow medical treatment.
In addition, you ought to put emergency medical providers on the list
of people to be compensated when they deal with undocumented persons. I
hope you will extend that common sense and courtesy that you have given
me in this amendment and extend it to the others, too.
Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Filner).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Hayworth
Mr. HAYWORTH. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 3 printed in House Report 109-350 offered by
Mr. Hayworth:
At the end of the bill, insert the following:
TITLE IX--AMENDMENTS TO VISA NUMBERS
SEC. 901. ELIMINATION OF FAMILY 4TH PREFERENCE VISA CATEGORY
FOR ADULT SIBLINGS OF CITIZENS.
(a) In General.--Section 203(a) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(a)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``paragraph (4)'' and
inserting ``paragraph (3)''; and
(2) by striking paragraph (4).
(b) Conforming Amendments.--The Immigration and Nationality
Act is amended--
(1) in section 201(c)(1)(A)(i) (8 U.S.C. 1151(c)(1)(A)(i)),
by striking ``480,000'' and inserting ``415,000'';
(2) in section 204(a)(1)(A)(i) (8 U.S.C. 1154(a)(1)(A)(i)),
by striking ``(1), (3), or (4)'' and inserting ``(1) or
(3)''; and
(3) in section 212(d)(11) (8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(11)), by
striking ``(other than paragraph (4) thereof)''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to visa numbers for fiscal years beginning with
the first fiscal year beginning after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
SEC. 902. INCREASE IN EMPLOYMENT BASED VISAS.
(a) In General.--Section 201(d)(1)(A) of the Immigration
and Nationality Act is amended by striking ``140,000'' and
inserting ``205,000''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall apply beginning with the first fiscal year that begins
after the date of the enactment of this Act.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 621, the gentleman
from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. HAYWORTH. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Chairman, the amendment I plan to offer today simply cannot be
considered outside a comprehensive immigration reform effort, which,
respectfully, this bill is not. Therefore, I would like to use my time
to discuss the principle reflected in my amendment, one that thus far
has been absent from this debate.
Madam Chairman, as we consider ways to meet our legitimate labor
needs, the choice before us is not limited to doing nothing or jumping
into a guest worker plan we all know will never work and I promise we
will one day regret. There is another way.
Madam Chairman, we already have an immigration system in place that
we can amend and change to reconcile economic demands with other
important priorities, such as diversity of admissions. The worker
scheme is based on the same defeatist notion that we cannot stop it, so
we might as well legalize it, used by proponents of legalizing drugs
and prostitution. Legalization has not worked for those vices and it
will not work for illegal immigration.
Some have the audacity to claim a guest worker plan is not amnesty
because it does not, in the President's words, place undocumented
workers on an automatic path to citizenship. Madam Chairman, what does
citizenship have to do with it? Most illegals do not come here with a
copy of the Constitution in their back pockets yearning to become
Americans. They come here mostly for one reason: a job. You can call it
legalization or earned status adjustment or regularization, but a guest
worker plan that lets illegals keep their jobs is amnesty.
Madam Chairman, do not take my word for it. Here is what the
President of the National Council of La Raza said of the distinction
between legalization and amnesty: ``The net effect is the same.''
Madam Chairman, under a guest worker plan, illegal aliens would be
pardoned for all their document and employment-related crimes, get
credit toward Social Security benefits for what they have earned
illegally, and get to bring in their families and unfairly gain for
their children born here one of the most coveted distinctions on Earth,
that of American citizenship.
Madam Chairman, my colleagues, as we consider ways to stop illegal
immigration, we should be guided by two principles: number one, do not
reward law breakers, including illegal aliens or those who hire them;
number two, do not create incentives for even more illegal immigration.
A guest worker scheme violates both. It also has something else going
[[Page H11944]]
against it, Madam Chairman: history. There has never been a successful
guest worker program, not here, not in Europe, not anywhere. Those
rioting in France are the children of temporary workers who never left.
Saudi Arabia's 6 million guest workers live under conditions that have
been called modern-day slavery. A guest worker plan would likewise
create an American caste system that would insult our heritage. Our own
bracero programs were ended because they lowered wages for American
workers, exploited foreign workers and illegal immigration.
Guest worker proponents say our economy needs illegal alien workers;
but under a guest worker plan, they would have to leave in 6 years.
Madam Chairman, are we supposed to believe we will stop needing them
at that time? And what happens when guest workers do not leave as
required? Will all those now promoting this discredited idea be out
there leading the cause to round them up, or will they instead move to
grant them citizenship?
Madam Chairman, if we are feeble enough to allow a guest worker plan
to be added to this bill, it will be 1986 all over again: amnesty now,
enforcement never, and an unending wave of illegal immigration.
Again, there is a better way: reform our legal immigration system to
attract the kind of high-skilled workers that our economy really needs.
Madam Chairman, immigration must serve the national interests, not
just the interests of businesses hooked on cheap labor or left wing
political activists out to reshape American politics and culture.
Madam Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that my amendment be
withdrawn.
Mr. BERMAN. Madam Chairman, reserving the right to object, and I do
not intend to object, might I ask the author of the amendment, as he
was speaking I was wondering what was going on. It sounded like he was
giving a very articulate and reasoned, I disagree with some of the
points, but reasoned position for an amendment that he was not allowed
to offer under this rule.
I am wondering whether he thought it might have been appropriate that
a coequal branch of the Congress, the House of Representatives, on an
issue as fundamental as the one he has just spoken to might have been
allowed to have had a couple of amendments in order for this issue to
be discussed and voted on in this body. Would that have been a sensible
way to approach this issue?
Mr. HAYWORTH. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield.
Mr. BERMAN. I yield to the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. HAYWORTH. Madam Chairman, I thank my friend from California.
Madam Chairman, I would say to my friend from California, my votes on
procedural questions speak for themselves in this regard. I thank the
gentleman for his time.
Mr. BERMAN. Madam Chairman, further reserving the right to object, in
case anyone noticed, the gentleman from Arizona did not support rules
which prevented us from discussing maybe the most important issue
involved in the context of whether or not to pursue comprehensive
immigration reform.
Madam Chairman, I withdraw my reservation.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
There was no objection.
Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Sensenbrenner
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 4 printed in House Report 109-350 offered by
Mr. Sensenbrenner:
In section 102--
(1) in subsection (b), in the matter before paragraph (1),
strike ``Committee on Homeland Security of the House of
Representatives'' and insert ``appropriate congressional
committees'';
(2) in subsection (b)(3), insert ``, except for ports of
entry and facilities subject to vulnerability assessments
under section 70102 or 70103 of title 46, United States
Code,'' after ``borders of the United States'';
(3) amend subsection (d) to read as follows:
(d) Coordination.-- The National Strategy for Border
Security described in subsection (b) shall be consistent with
the National Strategy for Maritime Security developed
pursuant to Homeland Security Presidential Directive 13.
(4) in subsection (f), strike ``Committee on Homeland
Security of the House of Representatives, such Committee
shall promptly report to the House'' and insert ``appropriate
congressional committees, such committees shall promptly
report to their respective House'';
(5) in subsection (g), insert ``and section 301(b)'' after
``this title''; and
(6) add at the end the following new subsection:
(h) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to alter, impact, diminish, or in any way undermine
the authority of the Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration to oversee, regulate, and control the safe and
efficient use of the airspace of the United States.
In section 111, strike ``Committee on Homeland Security of
the House of Representatives'' and insert ``appropriate
congressional committees''.
At the end of title I, add the following new section:
SEC. 118. VOLUNTARY RELOCATION PROGRAM EXTENSION.
Section 5739(e) of title 5, United States Code, is amended
by striking ``7'' and inserting ``12''.
In section 203, amend paragraph (3) to read as follows:
(3) by amending subsection (c) to read as follows:
``(c)(1) Whoever--
``(A) knowingly enters into a marriage for the purpose of
evading any provision of the immigration laws; or
``(B) knowingly misrepresents the existence or
circumstances of a marriage--
``(i) in an application or document arising under or
authorized by the immigration laws of the United States or
the regulations prescribed thereunder, or
``(ii) during any immigration proceeding conducted by an
administrative adjudicator (including an immigration officer
or examiner, a consular officer, an immigration judge, or a
member of the Board of Immigration Appeals);
shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, or
imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.
``(2) Whoever--
``(A) knowingly enters into two or more marriages for the
purpose of evading any provision of the immigration laws; or
``(B) knowingly arranges, supports, or facilitates two or
more marriages designed or intended to evade any provision of
the immigration laws;
shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, imprisoned
not less than 2 years nor more than 20 years, or both.
``(3) An offense under this subsection continues until the
fraudulent nature of the marriage or marriages is discovered
by an immigration officer.
``(4) For purposes of this section, the term `proceeding'
includes an adjudication, interview, hearing, or review.''
In section 275(e)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act, proposed to be inserted by section 203(5)--
(1) in subparagraph (A), strike ``(other than an aggravated
felony)''; and
(2) strike subparagraph (B) and insert the following:
(B) whose violation was subsequent to conviction for a
felony for which the alien received a sentence of 30 months
or more, shall be fined under title 18, United States Code,
imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both; or
(C) whose violation was subsequent to conviction for a
felony for which the alien received a sentence of 60 months
or more, shall be fined under title 18, United States Code,
imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.
In proposed section 275(e)(3) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act, as inserted by section 203(5)--
(1) strike ``(A) or (B)'' and insert ``(A), (B), or (C)'';
and
(2) strike ``an aggravated felony or other qualifying
crime'' and insert ``a qualifying crime''.
Strike section 210, and insert the following:
SEC. 210. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE FORENSIC DOCUMENTS LABORATORY.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall
establish a Fraudulent Documents Center (to be known as the
Forensic Document Laboratory) to carry out the following:
(1) Collect information from Federal, State, and local law
enforcement agencies, and foreign governments on the
production, sale, distribution, and use of fraudulent
documents intended to be used to enter, travel, or remain
within the United States unlawfully.
(2) Maintain the information described in paragraph (1) in
a comprehensive database.
(3) Maintain a repository of genuine and fraudulent travel
and identity document exemplars.
(4) Convert the information collected into reports that
provide guidance to government officials in identifying
fraudulent documents being used to enter into, travel within,
or remain in the United States.
(5) Develop a system for distributing these reports on an
ongoing basis to appropriate Federal, State, and local law
enforcement agencies.
(b) Distribution of Information.--The Forensic Document
Laboratory shall distribute its reports to appropriate
Federal, State, and
[[Page H11945]]
local law enforcement agencies on an ongoing basis.
At the end of title II, add the following new sections:
SEC. 211. MOTIONS TO REOPEN OR RECONSIDER.
(a) Exercise of Discretion.--Section 240(c) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1229a(c)) is
amended--
(1) by adding at the end of paragraph (5) the following new
subparagraph:
``(D) Discretion.--The decision to grant or deny a motion
to reconsider is committed to the Attorney General's
discretion.''; and
(2) by adding at the end of paragraph (6) the following new
subparagraph:
``(D) Discretion.--The decision to grant or deny a motion
to reopen is committed to the Attorney General's
discretion.''.
(b) Prima Facie Eligibility for Protection From Removal to
Alternative Country of Removal not Previously Considered.--
Section 240(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1229a) is further amended by adding at the end of
paragraph (6) the following new subparagraph:
``(E) Special rule for alternative countries of removal.--
The time and numerical limitations specified in this
paragraph shall not apply if--
``(i) the Secretary seeks to remove the alien to an
alternative or additional country of removal under
subparagraph (D) or (E) of section 241(b)(2) that had not
been considered during the alien's prior removal proceedings;
``(ii) the alien's motion to reopen is filed within 30 days
after the date the alien receives notice of the Secretary's
intention to remove the alien to that country; and
``(iii) the alien establishes a prima facie case that the
alien is entitled by law to withholding of removal under
section 241(b)(3) or protection under the Convention Against
Torture with respect to that particular country.''.
(c) Effective Date.--This section, and the amendments made
by this section, shall apply to motions to reopen and
reconsider that are filed on or after the date of the
enactment of this Act in removal, deportation, or exclusion
proceedings, regardless of whether a final administrative
order is entered before, on, or after such date.
SEC. 212. REFORM OF PASSPORT, VISA, AND IMMIGRATION FRAUD
OFFENSES.
Chapter 75 of title 18, United States Code is amended to
read as follows:
``CHAPTER 75--PASSPORT, VISA, AND IMMIGRATION FRAUD
``1541. Trafficking in passports.
``1542. False statement in an application for a passport.
``1543. Forgery and unlawful production of a passport.
``1544. Misuse of a passport.
``1545. Schemes to defraud aliens.
``1546. Immigration and visa fraud.
``1547. Attempts and conspiracies.
``1548. Increased penalties for certain offenses.
``1549. Seizure and forfeiture.
``1550. Additional jurisdiction.
``1551. Additional venue.
``1552. Definitions.
``1553. Authorized law enforcement activities.
``Sec. 1541. Trafficking in passports
``(a) Whoever, during any three-year period--
``(1) knowingly and without lawful authority produces,
issues, or transfers 10 or more passports; or
``(2) knowingly forges, counterfeits, alters, or falsely
makes 10 or more passports; or
``(3) knowingly secures, possesses, uses, receives, buys,
or sells 10 or more passports, knowing the passports to be
forged, counterfeited, altered, falsely made, stolen,
procured by fraud, issued, or designed for the use of
another, or produced or issued without lawful authority; or
``(4) knowingly completes, mails, prepares, presents,
signs, or submits 10 or more applications for a United States
passport (including any supporting documentation) knowing the
applications to contain any false statement or
representation;
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not less than 3
years nor more than 20 years, or both.
``(b) Whoever knowingly and without lawful authority
produces, counterfeits, secures, possesses, or uses any
official paper, seal, hologram, image, text, symbol, stamp,
engraving, plate, or other material used to make a passport
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not less than 3
years nor more than 20 years, or both.
``Sec. 1542. False statement in an application for a passport
``Whoever knowingly--
``(1) makes any false statement or representation in an
application for a United States passport (including any
supporting documentation); or
``(2) completes, mails, prepares, presents, signs, or
submits an application for a United States passport
(including any supporting documentation) knowing it to
contain any false statement or representation; or
``(3) causes or attempts to cause the production of a
passport by means of any fraud or false application for a
United States passport (including any supporting
documentation), when such production occurs or would occur at
a facility authorized by the Secretary of State for the
production of passports;
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15
years, or both.
``Sec. 1543. Forgery and unlawful production of a passport
``(a) Whoever--
``(1) knowingly forges, counterfeits, alters, or falsely
makes any passport; or
``(2) knowingly transfers any passport knowing it to be
forged, counterfeited, altered, falsely made, stolen, or to
have been produced or issued without lawful authority;
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15
years, or both.
``(b) Whoever knowingly and without lawful authority--
``(1) produces, issues, authorizes, or verifies a passport
in violation of the laws, regulations, or rules governing the
issuance of the passport; or
``(2) produces, issues, authorizes, or verifies a United
States passport for or to any person not owing allegiance to
the United States; or
``(3) transfers or furnishes a passport to a person for use
when such person is not the person for whom the passport was
issued or designed;
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15
years, or both.
``Sec. 1544. Misuse of a passport
``(a) Whoever--
``(1) knowingly uses any passport issued or designed for
the use of another; or
``(2) knowingly uses any passport in violation of the
conditions or restrictions therein contained, or in violation
of the laws, regulations, or rules governing the issuance and
use of the passport; or
``(3) knowingly secures, possesses, uses, receives, buys,
or sells any passport knowing it to be forged, counterfeited,
altered, falsely made, procured by fraud, or produced or
issued without lawful authority; or
``(4) knowingly violates the terms and conditions of any
safe conduct duly obtained and issued under the authority of
the United States;
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15
years, or both.
``(b) Whoever knowingly uses any passport--
``(1) to enter or to attempt to enter the United States, or
``(2) to defraud an agency of the United States, a State,
or a political subdivision of a State,
knowing the passport to be forged, counterfeited, altered,
falsely made, procured by fraud, produced or issued without
lawful authority, or issued or designed for the use of
another, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not less
than 6 months nor more than 15 years, or both.
``Sec. 1545. Schemes to defraud aliens
``(a) Whoever knowingly defrauds any person in connection
with--
``(1) any matter that is authorized by or arises under the
immigration laws of the United States, or
``(2) any matter the offender claims or represents is
authorized by or arises under the immigration laws of the
United States,
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15
years, or both.
``(b) Whoever knowingly and falsely represents himself to
be an attorney in any matter authorized by or arising under
the immigration laws of the United States shall be fined
under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both.
``Sec. 1546. Immigration and visa fraud
``(a) Whoever--
``(1) knowingly uses any immigration document issued or
designed for the use of another; or
``(2) knowingly forges, counterfeits, alters, or falsely
makes any immigration document; or
``(3) knowingly completes, mails, prepares, presents,
signs, or submits any immigration document knowing it to
contain any materially false statement or representation; or
``(4) knowingly secures, possesses, uses, transfers,
receives, buys, or sells any immigration document knowing it
to be forged, counterfeited, altered, falsely made, stolen,
procured by fraud, issued or designed for another, or
produced or issued without lawful authority; or
``(5) knowingly adopts or uses a false or fictitious name
to evade or to attempt to evade the immigration laws; or
``(6) knowingly and without lawful authority transfers or
furnishes an immigration document to a person for use when
such person is not the person for whom the immigration
document was issued or designed;
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15
years, or both.
``(b) Whoever, during any three-year period--
``(1) knowingly and without lawful authority produces,
issues, or transfers 10 or more immigration documents; or
``(2) knowingly forges, counterfeits, alters, or falsely
makes 10 or more immigration documents; or
``(3) knowingly secures, possesses, uses, buys, or sells 10
or more immigration documents, knowing the immigration
documents to be forged, counterfeited, altered, stolen,
falsely made, procured by fraud, or issued or designed for
the use of another, or produced or issued without lawful
authority; or
``(4) knowingly completes, mails, prepares, presents,
signs, or submits 10 or more immigration documents knowing
the documents to contain any materially false statement or
representation;
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not less than 2
years nor more than 20 years, or both.
``(c) Whoever knowingly and without lawful authority
produces, counterfeits, secures,
[[Page H11946]]
possesses, or uses any official paper, seal, hologram, image,
text, symbol, stamp, engraving, plate, or other material used
to make an immigration document shall be fined under this
title, imprisoned not less than 2 years nor more than 20
years, or both.
``Sec. 1547. Attempts and conspiracies
``Whoever attempts or conspires to violate any section
within this chapter shall be punished in the same manner as a
completed violation of that section. An attempt offense under
this chapter is a general intent crime.
``Sec. 1548. Increased penalties for certain offenses
``(a) Whoever violates any of the sections within this
chapter with the intent to facilitate an act of international
terrorism (as defined in section 2331 of this title) shall be
fined under this title, imprisoned not less than 7 years nor
more than 25 years, or both.
``(b) Whoever violates any section in this chapter with the
intent to facilitate the commission of any offense against
the United States (other than an offense in this chapter) or
against any State, which offense is punishable by
imprisonment for more than 1 year, shall be fined under this
title, imprisoned not less than 3 years nor more than 20
years, or both.
``Sec. 1549. Seizure and forfeiture
``(a) Any property, real or personal, that has been used to
commit or facilitate the commission of a violation of any
section within this chapter, the gross proceeds of such
violation, and any property traceable to such property or
proceeds, shall be subject to forfeiture.
``(b) Seizures and forfeitures under this section shall be
governed by the provisions of chapter 46 of this title,
relating to civil forfeitures, including section 981(d) of
such title, except that such duties as are imposed upon the
Secretary of the Treasury under the customs laws described in
that section shall be performed by such officers, agents, and
other persons as may be designated for that purpose by the
Secretary of Homeland Security, the Secretary of State, or
the Attorney General.
``Sec. 1550. Additional jurisdiction
``(a) Whoever commits an offense under this chapter within
the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the
United States shall be punished as provided by that offense.
``(b) Whoever commits an offense under this chapter outside
the United States shall be punished as provided by that
offense if--
``(1) the offense involves a United States immigration
document (or any document purporting to be the same) or any
matter, right, or benefit arising under or authorized by the
immigration laws of the United States or the regulations
prescribed thereunder; or
``(2) the offense is in or affects foreign commerce; or
``(3) the offense affects, jeopardizes, or poses a
significant risk to the lawful administration of the
immigration laws of the United States, or the national
security of the United States; or
``(4) the offense is committed to facilitate an act of
international terrorism (as defined in section 2331 of this
title) or a drug trafficking crime (as defined in section
929(a) of this title) that affects or would affect the
national security of the United States; or
``(5) an offender is a national of the United States (as
defined in section 101(a)(22) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. Sec. 1001(a)(22)) or an alien
lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United
States (as defined in section 101(a)(20) of the Immigration
and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. Sec. 1001(a)(20)); or
``(6) an offender is a stateless person whose habitual
residence is in the United States.
``Sec. 1551. Additional venue
``An offense under section 1542 of this chapter may be
prosecuted in--
``(1) any district in which the false statement or
representation was made; or
``(2) any district in which the passport application was
prepared, submitted, mailed, received, processed, or
adjudicated; or
``(3) in the case of an application prepared and
adjudicated outside the United States, in the district in
which the resultant passport was produced.
Nothing in this section limits the venue otherwise available
under sections 3237 and 3238 of this title.
``Sec. 1552. Definitions
``For purposes of this chapter:
``(1) The term `falsely make' means to prepare or complete
an immigration document with knowledge or in reckless
disregard of the fact that the document--
``(A) contains a statement or representation that is false,
fictitious, or fraudulent;
``(B) has no basis in fact or law; or
``(C) otherwise fails to state a fact that is material to
the purpose for which the document was created, designed, or
submitted.
``(2) The term a `false statement or representation'
includes a personation or an omission.
``(3) The term `felony' means any criminal offense
punishable by a term of imprisonment of more than 1 year
under the laws of the United States, any State, or a foreign
government.
``(4) The term `immigration document' means--
``(A) any passport or visa; or
``(B) any application, petition, affidavit, declaration,
attestation, form, identification card, alien registration
document, employment authorization document, border crossing
card, certificate, permit, order, license, stamp,
authorization, grant of authority, or other evidentiary
document, arising under or authorized by the immigration laws
of the United States.
Such term includes any document, photograph, or other piece
of evidence attached to or submitted in support of an
immigration document.
``(5) The term `immigration laws' includes--
``(A) the laws described in section 101(a)(17) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(17));
``(B) the laws relating to the issuance and use of
passports; and
``(C) the regulations prescribed under the authority of any
law described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of this subsection.
``(6) A person does not exercise `lawful authority' if the
person abuses or improperly exercises lawful authority the
person otherwise holds.
``(7) The term `passport' means a travel document attesting
to the identity and nationality of the bearer that is issued
under the authority of the Secretary of State, a foreign
government, or an international organization; or any
instrument purporting to be the same.
``(8) The term `produce' means to make, prepare, assemble,
issue, print, authenticate, or alter.
``(9) The term `State' means a State of the United States,
the District of Columbia, and any commonwealth, territory, or
possession of the United States.
``Sec. 1553. Authorized law enforcement activities
``The sections in this chapter do not prohibit any lawfully
authorized investigative, protective, or intelligence
activity of a law enforcement agency of the United States, a
State, or a subdivision of a State, or of an intelligence
agency of the United States, or any activity authorized under
title V of the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970 (18 U.S.C.
note prec. 3481).''.
SEC. 213. CRIMINAL DETENTION OF ALIENS.
(a) Section 3142(e) of title 18, United States Code, is
amended by inserting at the end the following:
``Subject to rebuttal by the person, it shall be presumed
that no condition or combination of conditions will
reasonably assure the appearance of the person as required if
the judicial officer finds that there is probable cause to
believe that the person is an alien and that the person--
``(1) has no lawful immigration status in the United
States;
``(2) is the subject of a final order of removal; or
``(3) has committed a felony offense under section 911,
922(g)(5), 1015, 1028, 1425, or 1426 of this title, or any
section of chapters 75 and 77 of this title, or section 243,
274, 275, 276, 277, or 278, of the Immigration and
Nationality Act.''.
(b) Section 3142(g)(3) of title 18, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (A)
and by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(C) the person's immigration status; and''.
SEC. 214. UNIFORM STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS FOR CERTAIN
IMMIGRATION, NATURALIZATION, AND PEONAGE
OFFENSES.
Section 3291 of title 18, United States Code, is amended to
read as follows:
``SEC. 3291. IMMIGRATION, NATURALIZATION, AND PEONAGE
OFFENSES.
``No person shall be prosecuted, tried, or punished for a
violation of any section of chapters 69 (relating to
nationality and citizenship offenses), 75 (relating to
passport, visa, and immigration offenses), or 77 (relating to
peonage, slavery, and trafficking in persons) of this title
(or for attempt or conspiracy to violate any such section),
or for a violation of any criminal provision of sections 243,
266, 274, 275, 276, 277, or 278 of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (or for attempt or conspiracy to violate any
such section), unless the indictment is returned or the
information filed within ten years after the commission of
the offense.''.
SEC. 215. CONFORMING AMENDMENT.
Subparagraph (P) of section 101(a)(43) of the Immigration
and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``(i) which either is falsely making,
forging, counterfeiting, mutilating, or altering a passport
or instrument in violation of section 1543 of Title 18 or is
described in section 1546(a) of such title (relating to
document fraud) and (ii)'' and inserting ``which is described
in any section of chapter 75 of title 18, United States
Code,''; and
(2) by inserting after ``first offense'' the following:
``(i) that is not described in section 1548 (relating to
increased penalties), and (ii)''.
SEC. 216. INADMISSIBILITY FOR PASSPORT AND IMMIGRATION FRAUD.
(a) In General.--Section 212(a)(2)(A)(i) of the Immigration
and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(2)(A)(i)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``or'' at the end of subclause (I);
(2) by inserting ``or'' at the end of subclause (II); and
(3) by inserting the following new subparagraph:
``(III) a violation of (or a conspiracy or attempt to
violate) any section of chapter 75 of title 18, United States
Code,''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a)
shall apply to proceedings pending on or after the date of
the enactment of this Act.
[[Page H11947]]
SEC. 217. REMOVAL FOR PASSPORT AND IMMIGRATION FRAUD.
(a) In General.--Clause (iii) of section 237(a)(3)(B) of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.1227(a)(3)(B))
is amended to read as follows ``(iii) of a violation of, or
an attempt or a conspiracy to violate, any section of chapter
75 of title 18, United States Code,''.
(b) Effective Date.--This amendment made by subsection (a)
shall apply to proceedings pending on or after the date of
the enactment of this Act
In section 301--
(1) in subsection (b), in the matter preceding paragraph
(1), strike ``Congress'' and insert ``appropriate
congressional committees (as defined in section 102(g))'';
and
(2) in subsection (c), strike ``Rule of Construction'' and
insert ``Rules of Construction'', insert ``(1)'' before
``Nothing'' and add at the end the following new paragraph:
(2) Nothing in this section shall be construed to alter,
impact, diminish, or in any way undermine the authority of
the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration to
oversee, regulate, and control the safe and efficient use of
the airspace of the United States.
In section 305(a), in the matter before paragraph (1),
strike ``any activity'' and insert ``any terrorism prevention
or deterrence activity''.
At the end of title III, add the following new section:
SEC. 308. RED ZONE DEFENSE BORDER INTELLIGENCE PILOT PROGRAM.
(a) Establishment.--The Secretary of Homeland Security and
the Director of National Intelligence shall jointly establish
a pilot program to improve the coordination and management of
intelligence and homeland security information provided to or
utilized by the Department of Homeland Security relating to
the southwest international land and maritime border of the
United States.
(b) Pilot Area.--The Secretary of Homeland Security and the
Director of National Intelligence shall designate a
geographic area along the southwest international land and
maritime border of the United States centered on Cochise
County, Arizona, to be the pilot area for the pilot program
established pursuant to subsection (a).
(c) Program.--The pilot program established pursuant to
subsection (a) shall--
(1) coordinate and facilitate the sharing of intelligence
and homeland security information related to border security
within the pilot area designated pursuant to subsection (b)
among Federal, State, local, and tribal governments,
including relevant intelligence and homeland security
information provided to the Department of Homeland Security
by the intelligence community and relevant intelligence and
homeland security information gathered by the Department of
Homeland Security from other sources;
(2) to the maximum extent possible, provide for persistent
surveillance of such pilot area;
(3) to the maximum extent possible, utilize airships,
aerostats, and existing unmanned aerial vehicles to provide
for surveillance of such pilot area;
(4) to the maximum extent possible, fully utilize the
capabilities of underutilized assets currently available to
conduct surveillance of such pilot area;
(5) where practicable, utilize the capabilities of existing
operational and analytical centers that analyze intelligence
and homeland security information relating to such pilot area
from multiple sources and improve the interoperability of
such centers;
(6) consistent with applicable security requirements,
disseminate actionable intelligence and homeland security
information relating to border security within such pilot
area to the appropriate Federal, State, local, tribal, and
foreign governments to support operational activities
relating to border security within such pilot area;
(7) provide for direct transmission of such actionable
intelligence and homeland security information to operational
and analytical centers included in the pilot program;
(8) provide for a representative of the Department of
Homeland Security to be assigned to each operational and
analytical center to facilitate the immediate utilization,
where practicable, of such actionable intelligence and
homeland security information; and
(9) develop metrics to assess the capability of such pilot
program to improve border security.
(d) Strategy Coordination.--In establishing the pilot
program under subsection (a), the Director of National
Intelligence shall coordinate the intelligence activities of
the pilot program with the relevant activities and programs
of other elements of the intelligence community.
(e) Headquarters.--The Secretary of Homeland Security and
the Director of National Intelligence may establish a
headquarters for the pilot program established pursuant to
subsection (a) within the area designated as the pilot area
pursuant to subsection (b).
(f) Duration.--The pilot program established pursuant to
subsection (a) shall last a minimum of two years.
(g) Report.--Not later than one year after the
establishment of the pilot program pursuant to subsection
(a), the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Director of
National Intelligence shall submit to Congress a report
containing--
(1) the lessons learned from such pilot program based on
the metrics developed pursuant to subsection (c)(9);
(2) recommendations for enhancing the provision and sharing
of intelligence and homeland security information relating to
border security under the National Strategy for Border
Security submitted pursuant to section 102(b) and with other
programs of the intelligence community relating to border
security; and
(3) an identification of any provisions of law that may
impede effective coordination of intelligence and homeland
security information relating to the southwest international
land and maritime border of the United States.
(h) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Homeland security information.--The term ``homeland
security information'' has the meaning given the term in
section 892(f)(1) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6
U.S.C. 482(f)(1)).
(2) Intelligence community.--The term ``intelligence
community'' has the meaning given the term in section 3(4) of
the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 401a(4)).
(i) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out
this section .
In section 401(c), add at the end the following paragraph:
(3) Discretion.--Nothing in this section shall be construed
as limiting the authority of the Secretary of Homeland
Security, in the Secretary's sole unreviewable discretion, to
determine whether an alien described in clause (ii) of
section 235(b)(1)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act
shall be detained or released after a finding of a credible
fear of persecution (as defined in clause (v) of such
section).
In section 431(e) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, as
added by section 502(a), insert ``the Department of
Transportation,'' after ``Justice,''.
Amend clause (vi) of section 601(a)(1)(B) to read as
follows:
(vi) by striking the last sentence and inserting the
following: ``The Secretary of Homeland Security shall waive
the application of clause (v) in the case of removal of an
alien who is a native or citizen of a country in the Western
Hemisphere with whose government the United States does not
have full diplomatic relations.
In section 602(a)--
(1) in section 241(a)(8) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act, inserted by paragraph (8)
(A) strike ``procedures described'' and insert ``rules set
forth''; and
(B) strike the dash and ``(A)'' and strike ``, and'' and
all that follows up to the period at the end; and
(2) in section 241(j) of such Act, inserted by paragraph
(9)--
(A) in paragraph (1), strike ``procedures described'' and
insert ``rules set forth'';
(B) in paragraph (3)(B)(i) strike ``subparagraph (A) if''
and all the follows through ``apply.'' and insert the
following:
`` subparagraph (A)--
``(I) until the alien is removed if the conditions
described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (4) apply;
or
``(II) pending a determination as provided in subparagraph
(C) of paragraph (4).''
In section 241(j)(3)(B)(ii) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act, inserted by section 602(a)(9), strike ``
paragraph (4)(A)'' and insert ``paragraph (4)(B)''.
In section 611--
(1) strike ``section 103(d)(1)'' and insert ``sections
103(d)(1) and 105(a)(2)(A)''; and
(2) strike ``is amended'' and insert ``are each amended''.
Add at the end of title VI, the following new sections:
SEC. 615. REPORT ON CRIMINAL ALIEN PROSECUTION.
Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of
this Act and annually thereafter, the Attorney General shall
submit to the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on the Judiciary of the
Senate a report on the status of criminal alien prosecutions,
including prosecutions of human smugglers.
SEC. 616. DETERMINATION OF IMMIGRATION STATUS OF INDIVIDUALS
CHARGED WITH FEDERAL OFFENSES.
(a) Responsibility of United States Attorneys.--Beginning 2
years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the office
of the United States attorney that is prosecuting a criminal
case in a Federal court--
(1) shall determine, not later than 30 days after filing
the initial pleadings in the case, whether each defendant in
the case is lawfully present in the United States (subject to
subsequent legal proceedings to determine otherwise);
(2)(A) if the defendant is determined to be an alien
lawfully present in the United States, shall notify the court
in writing of the determination and the current status of the
alien under the Immigration and Nationality Act; and
(B) if the defendant is determined not to be lawfully
present in the United States, shall notify the court in
writing of the determination, the defendant's alien status,
and, to the extent possible, the country of origin or legal
residence of the defendant; and
(3) ensure that the information described in paragraph (2)
is included in the case file and the criminal records system
of the office of the United States attorney.
The determination under paragraph (1) shall be made in
accordance with guidelines of the
[[Page H11948]]
Executive Office for Immigration Review of the Department of
Justice.
(b) Responsibilities of Federal Courts.--
(1) Modifications of records and case managements
systems.--Not later than 2 years after the date of the
enactment of this Act, all Federal courts that hear criminal
cases, or appeals of criminal cases, shall modify their
criminal records and case management systems, in accordance
with guidelines which the Director of the Administrative
Office of the United States Courts shall establish, so as to
enable accurate reporting of information described in
paragraph (2) of subsection (a).
(2) Data entries.--Beginning 2 years after the date of the
enactment of this Act, each Federal court described in
paragraph (1) shall enter into its electronic records the
information contained in each notification to the court under
subsection (a)(2).
(c) Annual Report to Congress.--The Director of the
Administrative Office of the United States Courts shall
include, in the annual report filed with the Congress under
section 604 of title 28, United States Code--
(1) statistical information on criminal trials of aliens in
the courts and criminal convictions of aliens in the lower
courts and upheld on appeal, including the type of crime in
each case and including information on the legal status of
the aliens; and
(2) recommendations on whether additional court resources
are needed to accommodate the volume of criminal cases
brought against aliens in the Federal courts.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated for each of fiscal years 2007 through
2012, such sums as may be necessary to carry out this Act.
Funds appropriated pursuant to this subsection in any fiscal
year shall remain available until expended.
In section 274A(h)(4) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act, as added by section 705--
(1) amend the heading to read: ``RECRUITMENT AND
REFERRAL'';
(2) amend the third sentence to read as follows: ``However,
labor service agencies, whether public, private, for-profit,
or nonprofit, that refer, dispatch, or otherwise facilitate
the hiring of workers for any period of time by a third party
are included in the definition whether or not they receive
remuneration.'' ; and
(3) amend the sixth sentence to read as follows: ``However,
labor service agencies, whether public, private, for-profit,
or nonprofit, that refer, dispatch, or otherwise facilitate
the hiring of workers for any period of time by a third party
are included in the definition whether or not they receive
remuneration.''.
Redesignate section 708 as 709, and insert after section
707 the following new section:
SEC. 708. EXTENSION OF PREEMPTION TO REQUIRED CONSTRUCTION OF
DAY LABORER SHELTERS.
Paragraph 274A(h)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act (8 U.S.C. 1324a(h)(2)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``imposing'', and inserting a dash and
``(A) imposing'';
(2) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``;
and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(B) Requiring as a condition of conducting, continuing,
or expanding a business that a business entity--
``(i) provide, build, fund, or maintain a shelter,
structure, or designated area for use by day laborers at or
near its place of business; or
``(ii) take other steps that facilitate the employment of
day laborers by others.''.
At the end of title VIII add the following:
SEC. 807. CLARIFICATION OF JURISDICTION ON REVIEW.
(a) Review of Discretionary Determinations.--Section
242(a)(2)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.
1252(a)(2)(B)) is amended--
(1) by inserting before ``no court'' the following: ``and
regardless of whether the individual determination, decision,
or action is made in removal proceedings,'';
(2) in clause (i), by striking ``any judgment'' and
inserting ``any individual determination''; and
(3) in clause (ii)--
(A) by inserting ``discretionary'' after ``any other'';
(B) by striking ``the authority for which is specified
under this title to be in the discretion of the Attorney
General or the Secretary of Homeland Security,'' and
inserting ``under this title or the regulations promulgated
hereunder,''; and
(C) by striking the period at the end and inserting the
following: ``, irrespective of whether such decision or
action is guided or informed by standards, regulatory or
otherwise.''.
(b) Review of Orders Against Criminal Aliens.--Section
242(a)(2)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.
1252(a)(2)(C)) is amended by inserting after ``of removal''
the following: ``(irrespective of whether relief or
protection was denied on the basis of the alien's having
committed a criminal offense)''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to petitions for review that are pending on or
after the date of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 808. FEES AND EXPENSES IN JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS.
(a) In General.--Section 242 of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1252) is amended by adding at the
end the following new subsection:
``(i) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a court
shall not award fees or other expenses to an alien based upon
the alien's status as a prevailing party in any proceedings
relating to an order of removal issued under this Act, unless
the court of appeals concludes that the Attorney General's
determination that the alien was removable under section 212
or 237 was not substantially justified.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall apply to fees or other expenses awarded on or after the
date of the enactment of this Act.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 621, the gentleman
from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr.
Conyers) each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Chairman, for purposes of clarification, before I summarize the
provisions within the manager's amendment, I will highlight what the
amendment does not contain.
The amendment does not contain a sense of Congress on foreign
workers; nor does it decrease the criminal penalties for illegal entry
and illegal presence. The latter issue will be addressed in a separate
amendment I will soon offer.
I will now summarize the provisions of the manager's amendment within
the jurisdiction of the Judiciary Committee.
First, the amendment contains a provision drafted by the gentleman
from Utah (Mr. Cannon) that will prohibit localities from requiring
businesses to set up day labor sites as a condition for conducting or
expanding a business. No business should be compelled to facilitate the
hiring of illegal aliens by establishing labor sites on or near their
premises, and this amendment will prohibit this practice.
The amendment also contains a provision drafted by the gentleman from
California (Mr. Issa) that requires the Attorney General to report on
the status of criminal alien prosecutions, including prosecutions of
smugglers. Mr. Issa is rightly concerned about the lack of sufficient
prosecutions of alien smugglers who prey upon the most vulnerable.
The amendment also includes a number of important provisions that
will facilitate the ability of the Departments of Justice and Homeland
Security to combat illegal immigration. Specifically, the amendment
sets mandatory minimum sentences for repeated marriage fraud; improved
sentencing enhancements for aliens who enter illegally after criminal
convictions; clarifies that the Board of Immigration Appeals' decisions
on motions to reopen removal proceedings are not subject to judicial
review; increases penalties for passport and immigration fraud and
penalizes fraud against aliens applying for immigration benefits; makes
criminal defendants' immigration status an express consideration in
determining whether they should be released on bond; extends the
statute of limitations for all immigration-related fraud; makes
passport fraud a ground of inadmissibility and deportability; and
abolishes attorneys' fee awards to removable aliens under the Equal
Access to Justice Act.
{time} 1545
Madam Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Chairman, we come to the floor with a 39-page manager's
amendment that has never been considered in the committee during the
rather lengthy number of times that we have held hearings at the
subcommittee and full committee level. And while there are fortunately
some parts of it that I can agree to, I have counted approximately nine
parts of it that present very serious problems.
One is that the punishment does not fit the crime. The manager's
amendment would expand the definition of aggravated felony to include a
wide range of passport and related document offenses, even if the
person never spent a day in jail. As I have previously stated, the
consequences of an aggravated felony conviction are severe. They
include, among other things, mandatory detention, permanent deportation
and
[[Page H11949]]
ineligibility for any type of relief. And so I think that is a very
serious criticism. It criminalizes the most vulnerable of our
populations.
This manager's amendment, with regard to passport fraud, would
criminalize trafficking victims, victims of domestic violence or abuse,
victims of animals, coyotes, and others who often do not have control
over what documents are presented to immigration officials on their
behalf.
Madam Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California
(Mr. Berman), a member of the committee.
Mr. BERMAN. Madam Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me
this time, and I would ask the chairman to consider one specific thing
about one very discrete narrow part of the manager's amendment.
In the fantasy world we are in, should this bill ever actually become
a law, the issue on the passport violations that the gentleman from
Michigan just spoke to, there are limited situations where someone that
you and I and everyone around would agree truly was a refugee, with a
well-founded fear of persecution, escaping from a politically
repressive regime took advantage of some kind of falsified and altered
passport in order to escape.
The only question I have, as we look at the manager's amendment now,
there should be some discretion here in the context of either
criminalizing or deportation to allow a situation where that was the
purpose; the person met the full test of a refugee and that that not
become a basis for deporting him or her back to the regime or
incarcerating that person or charging them with a criminal offense.
Mr. CONYERS. Madam Chairman, I would be pleased to yield 30 seconds
to the chairman of the committee.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding
me this time.
First, on the hypothetical the gentleman from California raised,
there is this thing called prosecutorial discretion. It seems to me we
should have more faith in our prosecutors not to prosecute genuine
refugees, but continue the law on the books as proposed in the
manager's amendment that will get at the people who use passport fraud
to cover the transportation of a lot of people who are not refugees and
who should not enter the United States.
Mr. CONYERS. Madam Chairman, I yield 15 seconds to the gentleman from
California.
Mr. BERMAN. Madam Chairman, I felt that answer was not totally
satisfactory from my point of view.
Would somewhere in the context of the language of that provision or
the report language indicate that it is not our intent in that
situation, with your classic refugee purpose?
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds to say
that, should this matter survive conference, there will be a statement
that it is not intended to include the situation in the statement on
the part of the managers. And I can say, as the floor manager of this
bill and the author of the manager's amendment, it does not either.
Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. Madam Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
The other point that we would like to make, and there are so many,
but the manager's amendment punishes amazingly battered immigrant women
who would suffer some very harsh consequences when they are frequently
forced by their batterers to use fraudulent travel documents.
Under the Violence Against Women Act, battered immigrants are
entitled to self-petition for immigration status, independent of their
abusive U.S. citizen and lawful permanent residence spouse. So this
would be a huge step backwards for those of us who have been working in
this area.
So I urge and I hope that because there has been insufficient
attention given in the committee and since we did not know these were
going to come up, that the manager's amendment will be turned back and
that we be given an opportunity to examine this more than a dozen
objections that we raise.
Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mrs. Emerson). The question is on the amendment
offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Price of Georgia
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 5 printed in House Report 109-350 offered by Mr. Price
of Georgia:
In section 101(a), in the matter preceding paragraph (1),
strike ``The Secretary'' insert ``Not later than 18 months
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary''.
In section 101(b), strike ``the entry into the United
States of'' and insert ``all unlawful entries into the United
States, including entries by''.
In section 101, add at the end the following new
subsection:
(c) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of the
enactment of this Act and annually thereafter, the Secretary
shall submit to Congress a report on the progress made toward
achieving and maintaining operational control over the entire
international land and maritime borders of the United States
in accordance with this section.
In section 102(b), insert after paragraph (3) the following
new paragraph (and redesignate subsequent paragraphs
accordingly):
(4) An assessment of all legal requirements that prevent
achieving and maintaining operational control over the entire
international land and maritime borders of the United States.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 621, the gentleman
from Georgia (Mr. Price) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I want to thank the Speaker, Chairman King, Chairman Sensenbrenner,
the Homeland Security Committee, the Judiciary and Rules Committee, and
their staffs, for their wonderful help in the preparation of this
amendment and, frankly, for this debate and bringing this issue
forward.
Based on my experience in representing Georgians in both the State
Senate and in Congress, this chamber is now dealing with the issue of
immigration reform and border security because the American people are
demanding it. Recent public opinion polling confirms what we all know,
and that is that illegal immigration is as important as other major
issues, including the war on terror and the economy.
Such overwhelming support for border security and immigration reform
is due to a general sense and knowledge that our current policy is one
of benign neglect. An estimated 12 to 20 million illegal aliens live
here, and the presence of so many illegal aliens undermines our rule of
law.
Today, the people's body is heeding the will of the American people.
Many of the ideas introduced by Members of the House, in fact, reflect
very specific concerns of their constituents, and I believe that my
amendment is one of those that properly reflects the voice of the
populace.
This amendment sets a hard deadline, a specific date of 18 months
following adoption of the legislation to achieve complete operational
control over our borders. In addition, it would clarify the working
definition of operational control of our border to include the
prevention of all unlawful entries into the United States.
My amendment is a critical component to the border security debate
because it provides the accountability portion, and it signifies to the
American people that there will be no more excuses. Illegal entries
into the United States will not be tolerated because our Nation is not
secure unless our borders are secure.
Instead of kicking the problem down the road just a little bit, the
Federal Government is given the specific goal to get the current crisis
under control. This is called accountability, something that we say we
all want from government. A hard deadline holds the executive branch,
Congress and the bureaucracy accountable.
The House leadership, the Judiciary Committee and the Homeland
Security Committee should be praised for their efforts. Stopping the
influx of illegal aliens begins with solid border security and interior
enforcement, and we are finally addressing the crisis that so many of
our constituents rightfully believe to be of paramount importance.
[[Page H11950]]
I respectfully ask my colleagues to support this amendment of
accountability.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time on this side,
although I am not opposed to the amendment of the gentleman from
Georgia.
The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mr. Hayes). Without objection, the gentleman is
recognized.
There was no objection.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I think our colleague from Georgia has an excellent
amendment, but I think his deadline may be too generous. The Department
of Homeland Security should report to Congress on the progress it is
making to secure our borders, but, unfortunately, they have an
unenviable record of submitting their reports to the Congress. Our
ranking member of the Homeland Security Committee has written Secretary
Chertoff twice on the repeated failures of the Department of Homeland
Security to meet congressionally mandated deadlines.
As you have stated, we have a duty to ensure that it is protecting
the American people, and to do that we must receive information to
ensure that the Department is up to the task. Every day that passes in
which Congress does not receive this information is another day that
the terrorists gain on us if they are planning the next attack.
So I support the amendment of the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price),
which gives the Homeland Security Department a lot of time, but I think
we want to ride a very careful herd over these fellows in terms of
where they go from this amendment.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. CONYERS. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment,
and I think we ought to talk about what operational control means.
Under the amendment, it means the prevention of all unlawful entries
into the United States, including by terrorists and illegal aliens, and
including all narcotics shipments.
The amendment also provides that, within 90 days of enactment, the
Department of Homeland Security provides the Congress a comprehensive
plan for border surveillance and, within 180 days, DHS provides to
Congress a national strategy for border security and a report on
progress made.
{time} 1600
Now these goals are obviously ambitious and the Department of
Homeland Security has not been ambitious on anything, in my opinion;
but it seems to me by setting deadlines, and then the two committees in
their oversight functions can be on the back of the Department of
Homeland Security, and we might shame them into doing the right thing.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, we have had a lot of
time here with the current administration to have ridden herd and call
for an accounting. I think the gentleman from Georgia is forced, and we
are all collectively forced, into this position. They have had plenty
of time to have been far more compliant.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) for making his
points, because I agree: our responsibility as a Congress is truly
oversight. It concerns me greatly that we do not get many of the
reports that we are due. I look forward to working with him and holding
the Department of Homeland Security's feet to the fire.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Culberson).
Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this
amendment as well as the underlying legislation because its focus is
law enforcement, and this is a law enforcement and a national security
issue. In controlling our borders, we will win the war on terror only
when we control our borders, and it is important that the country
recognize that northern Mexico has become like Colombia, owned lock,
stock and barrel by the drug lords whose law is ``plata o plomo,''
silver or lead. You work in my plaza, you pay me silver or I will kill
you now with lead, plomo; and we must have the rule of law and order on
the border and not the rule of plata o plomo.
The chairman has rightly focused this legislation on reestablishing
law and order on the border, and I applaud the gentleman from Georgia
for his amendment so we can keep the Department of Homeland Security
focused on giving us in Congress the information we need so we can
determine whether or not the United States is properly protecting its
border at a time when we are at war with terrorists who have told us
repeatedly that they are going to sneak into the country using whatever
means are necessary to hurt us. I urge all Members to support this
amendment and the underlying bill.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from California (Mr. Berman).
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time, and I do not oppose the amendment. In fact, I think it should be
labeled from ``our lips to God's ears.''
If we say that by a certain date we will stop and Homeland Security
will stop, using the chairman's definition, will have operational
control so that no terrorists, no illegal aliens, no drug smugglers
ever come into our country; if we say that and we say it strong enough,
then maybe it will happen.
And after we do that, I suggest a bill that says that by a certain
date we eliminate poverty, and pass that, and a few other very
important goals that I think we all share here.
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
This is a simple amendment regarding accountability, and I am
privileged to have the opportunity to offer it. We say that we want
accountability in this and other areas. Those charged with securing our
borders should be held accountable as well. I urge adoption of the
amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, we support the Price amendment, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting Chairman (Mr. Hayes). The question is on the amendment
offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Stearns
Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 6 printed in House Report 109-350 offered by
Mr. Stearns:
At the end of title I, add the following:
SEC. 118. COMPLETION OF BACKGROUND AND SECURITY CHECKS.
Section 103 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1103) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(i) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
Secretary of Homeland Security, the Attorney General, and the
courts may not--
``(1) grant or order the grant of adjustment of status of
an alien to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent
residence,
``(2) grant or order the grant of any other status, relief,
protection from removal, or other benefit under the
immigration laws, or
``(3) issue any documentation evidencing or related to such
grant by the Secretary, the Attorney General, or any court,
until an IBIS check on the alien has been initiated at a
Treasury Enforcement Communications System (TECS) access
level of no less than Level 3, results from the check have
been returned, and any derogatory information has been
obtained and assessed, and until any other such background
and security checks have been completed as the Secretary may
require.
``(j) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
Secretary of Homeland Security, the Attorney General, and the
courts may not--
``(1) grant or order the grant of adjustment of status of
an alien to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent
residence,
``(2) grant or order the grant of any other status, relief,
protection from removal, or other benefit under the
immigration laws, or
``(3) issue any documentation evidencing or related to such
grant by the Secretary, the Attorney General, or any court,
until any suspected or alleged fraud relating to the granting
of any status (including the granting of adjustment of
status), relief, protection from removal, or other benefit
under this subsection has been fully investigated and found
to be unsubstantiated.''.
[[Page H11951]]
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 621, the gentleman
from Florida (Mr. Stearns) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, obviously, I would like to thank the Rules Committee
publicly for allowing my amendment because I know there were probably
130 amendments, and I know they had a tough job deciding which ones to
allow to go forward.
In short, my amendment requires our government to ensure that the
applicant is not a known criminal or terrorist before granting them
immigration benefits. Pretty simple. But as the current law now stands,
background checks of alien applicants are required, but the law does
not specifically require these security checks to be completed before
these immigration benefits are actually handed out.
This means that many unworthy people have been able to receive these
crucial benefits which then enables them to move freely throughout our
country before their background checks are completely finished. By the
time we finally discover something questionable in their background, of
course it is too late to track them down. We cannot find them.
My amendment helps to close this loophole. My amendment will prohibit
the Department of Homeland Security, the Attorney General, and all
courts from granting any kind of legal immigration status or benefits
to an alien until, at a minimum, the alien's name is first completely
checked against a database of criminal records and terrorist watch
lists using the Treasury Enforcement Communication System database.
As it now stands, all three have been giving status to aliens before
they get their final results back from security checks. The result is
we are giving green cards, citizenship, work permits, and temporary
status to terrorists, criminals, and other unsavory types under this
arrangement, not always but sometimes.
For example, a new study by Janice Kephart, who was on the staff of
the 9/11 Commission, looked at the immigration histories of 94
terrorists, including six of the 9/11 hijackers who had operated on
U.S. soil between the 1990s and 2004. The results of this study are
quite frightening. Two-thirds, that is 59, of the foreign-born
terrorists studied committed immigration benefits fraud prior to or in
conjunction with taking part in terrorist activity.
My amendment should go a long way towards preventing this
irresponsible and dangerous loophole. I urge my colleagues to support
my amendment and the underlying bill.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I am not in opposition, but I would like to
claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman is recognized.
There was no objection.
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I congratulate and agree with the notion that no
immigration benefit should be given to any alien until all relevant
background and security checks have been completed and any suspected
fraud related to the granting of such status or benefit has been fully
investigated and found to be unsubstantiated.
The gentleman from Florida is right. He has said in the context of
his comments for this amendment that he believes that is happening now,
and he may be right. I do not know that it is not. But all I know is
that for my congressional office and for my colleagues' congressional
offices, every time our staffs call regarding the processing of an
immigration application, we hear there is nothing we can do. We are
waiting for the FBI to get an answer. Why the FBI is just choosing the
cases our congressional offices do, to hold back on providing
information and denying immigration benefits, I do not know. In other
words, what you say and what you ask for is correct, but the problem is
not so much with the immigrant. The problem is with the bureaucracy.
The resources, the leadership to get these terrorist lists, these
watch lists, the criminal database up to date so we can get this
information in a quick time is very important.
I would just like to tell a quick story about the NSEERS program in
Los Angeles. They had a registration date for different countries. If
you are here from Iran on a nonimmigrant visa, come in on such and such
date and register. People did that. Huge numbers of people flocked into
the Los Angeles office of INS to do that.
The FBI was totally unable to give any clearance to the people who
were coming in. Huge numbers of people were held, detained and kept
overnight over a weekend thinking they were just going to file a
registration form because the FBI could not get the clearance. That is
a scandalous way to treated a number of people who came here as
refugees fleeing the tyranny of the ayatollah because our bureaucracy
failed to provide the answers.
So to me the answer here in Homeland Security and the FBI and in the
other critical agencies is to get these lists and this other critical
information online and accurate and quick so that we can move ahead
with legitimate requests for these benefits that should be conditioned
on getting that information out.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), the chairman of the full Committee on
the Judiciary.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment.
This amendment has been triggered by a recent IG report of the
Department of Homeland Security that not all applicants for immigration
benefits undertake an IBIS check. The excuse that was given is that not
all U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service employees have a high
enough security clearance to conduct the proper checks, and some of the
problems stem from simple lax management. Neither of these excuses is
valid.
I am amazed that this has not always been a requirement of the law.
We should conduct a thorough background check of anybody who seeks
immigration benefits. The necessity of these checks was demonstrated by
the fact that at least six of the 9/11 hijackers, murderers, ended up
slipping through the cracks. I think this amendment plugs an important
loophole in the current law, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, the distinguished chairman of the Judiciary Committee
used the word ``amazed,'' and I am just amazed, too, that this
amendment would even be needed at this point.
The gentleman on the other side of the aisle has talked about the
resources, but we cannot even talk about the resources until we
implement the procedures. And so to get this procedure in place will
then determine if we have the resources and we can take the next step.
But I appreciate his example and his support.
I think it can be done and should be done; and before we give these
benefits, we should be sure these people are who they say they are. It
is the right thing to do.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the
ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida (Mr.
Stearns) will be postponed.
Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. Sensenbrenner
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 7 printed in House Report 109-350 offered by
Mr. Sensenbrenner:
In section 203(2), add ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (B), strike
``and'' at the end of subparagraph (C), and strike subparagraph (D).
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 621, the gentleman
[[Page H11952]]
from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) and the gentlewoman from California
(Ms. Zoe Lofgren) each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr.
Sensenbrenner).
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, under current law, illegal entry into the United States
makes an alien subject to a Federal criminal misdemeanor with a maximum
penalty of 6 months in prison. However, unlawful presence itself, such
as by overstaying a visa, is not a criminal offense, but only a civil
ground of inadmissibility.
Forty percent of the current illegal alien population entered
legally, but overstayed their visas. The other 60 percent of the
illegal alien population came here by illegal means and are therefore
already subject to criminal penalties for committing a Federal criminal
offense.
At the administration's request, the base bill makes unlawful
presence a crime, such as unlawful entry already is. This change makes
sense. Aliens who have disregarded our laws by overstaying their visas
to remain in the United States illegally should be just as culpable as
aliens who have broken our laws to enter and remain here illegally.
In the base bill, the maximum penalty for illegal entry was increased
to a year and a day, and the same penalty was set for unlawful
presence, to make the enhancements for these offenses consistent with
the other penalty enhancements of the bill.
{time} 1615
The administration subsequently requested the penalty for these
crimes be lowered to 6 months. Making the first offense a felony, as
the base bill would do, would require a grand jury indictment, a trial
before a district court judge and a jury trial.
Also because it is a felony, the defendant would be able to get a
lawyer at public expense if the defendant could not afford the lawyer.
These requirements would mean that the government would seldom if ever
actually use the new penalties. By leaving these offenses as
misdemeanors, more prosecutions are likely to be brought against those
aliens whose cases merit criminal prosecution.
For this reason, the amendment returns the sentence for illegal entry
to its current 6 months and sets the penalty for unlawful presence at
the same level. Some have argued that this provision would require 11
million prosecutions. That is not true. Prosecutorial resources are
limited, and authorities would rather quickly deport an alien whose
only offense is to be here unlawfully rather than to prosecute and have
to detain that alien pending trial.
Even if an alien were prosecuted under this provision, a conviction
of unlawful presence would not prevent an alien from some day attaining
legal status or even citizenship if the alien would otherwise qualify.
Making unlawful presence a crime, however, would serve as a greater
deterrence to aliens overstaying their visas. For these reasons, I ask
that the Members support this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time
as I may consume. Currently, illegal presence in the United States is
not a crime; it is a civil violation.
People who cross the border without inspection commit a crime for
improper entry but not an ongoing violation. The government can
prosecute you for crossing but not for existing after having done so.
This section, section 203, makes virtually any violation of the
immigration laws an ongoing criminal act. In one stroke, it would
subject the entire undocumented population, estimate by some to be 11
million people, to criminal liability.
Now the amendment before us changes the degree of punishment, but it
does not alter the underlying issue of criminalizing being alive in the
country without documents. I would like to note that, in addition to
adults, this would criminalize children who had no decision about
coming to the United States.
I understand, although, I was not present in the course of the
discussion in the Rules Committee, but that one of the Members of the
committee raised the issue of an individual, a young student who was
17, who actually thought that he was an American citizen and found out,
much to his surprise, that he was not.
That young man, under the underlying bill, would be a felon. Under
the amendment, he would be a misdemeanant, but in fact, he is not a
criminal at all. He is a kid who was brought here by his parents and
who is in a bind right now. Making him a criminal is not going to make
us any safer. It is not a reasonable thing to do. I oppose the
amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, I regret to say, the gentlewoman from California, whom
I greatly respect, is wrong. Under the Federal juvenile statute,
children cannot be prosecuted for any Federal crime, felony or
misdemeanor, if it is not a crime of violence or a drug trafficking
crime.
So her entire argument about making children subjected to Federal
criminal prosecution simply by being here is not valid. They can be
subjected if it is a crime of violence or a drug trafficking crime.
What this amendment does is reduce the penalties for this type of
immigration violation from a felony in the base bill to a misdemeanor.
That is all the amendment does.
And what it does do is criminalize the presence of the people here
who have overstayed their visas. Now those who have entered the United
States illegally, not through a port of entry and not submitting
themselves to inspection by U.S. Immigration and Customs authorities
commit a crime. That is a crime now. It is a Federal misdemeanor.
But if you do go through inspection and do not go home when you are
supposed to, then it becomes a civil ground of inadmissibility. So we
are treating illegal aliens differently. You are a potential
misdemeanant if convicted if you entered the United States illegally.
But if you overstayed your visa and did not go home, then you do not
subject yourself to criminal prosecution.
The bill takes care of this anomaly. But it makes both offenses
felonies. What this amendment does, it makes it misdemeanors. So if you
are against the amendment, you want to keep it as felonies because that
is in the base bill. You should be for the amendment to make it a
misdemeanor for the reasons that I have stated.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time
as I might consume.
In taking a look at section 203, the application of criminality is
actually quite broad. If you are here in the United States holding a
student visa, there are requirements, for example, that you take a
certain number of units in order to maintain that status. If, for
example, you fall below that, and I will say that there are many
students who, for one reason or another, one quarter might fall below
where they may need to be, you would be in violation of your student
visa status. Under the amendment before us, you would not just be
disappointing your parents who paid full tuition, you would be
committing a misdemeanor.
If you are a businessman here and your return flight home is
cancelled, causing your visitors visa, your B2 visa, to be expired, not
only would you be in technical violation if you were 2 days late to the
flight home, but you would also be committing a misdemeanor.
I do not think that is a reasonable approach. I also do not think
that it has anything to do with keeping our country safer. You know,
this debate started yesterday on the floor of the House. But it has
been ongoing in the media for quite some time. The John and Ken show in
California every day is taking about illegal immigration.
And we saw many Members, our friends on the other side of the aisle,
touting that they were going to have this tough bill. And then, of
course, today, we see that the Republicans are trying to back off on
that a little bit.
[[Page H11953]]
So it is easy to say one thing to the red meat talk shows, but here, of
course, we need to make some adjustments.
We think the adjustment is misguided, and it is not one that I can
support.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of the
time.
Mr. Chairman, two of the 9/11 hijackers overstayed their visas. Under
the current law, that is just a civil ground of inadmissibility. I
think that that should be some type of a crime so that at least they
can be detained.
The businessperson who inadvertently overstays their visa because the
flight is canceled, no problem; no prosecutor is going to prosecute
that person because of it. I see some games being played here. The
people who are saying that this bill is too harsh want to keep these
penalties as felonies. I do not know why that is. I think it will be
much better to make them misdemeanors, because at least, that way, we
do not have to have the taxpayers pay for a lawyer to defend them if
they do not have any money. And we do not have to have the space to
incarcerate them in Federal penitentiaries.
This amendment makes the bill workable. I believe it is a good
amendment. I urge its adoption.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Gutierrez.)
Mr. GUTIERREZ. Mr. Chairman, I stand in opposition to this amendment.
I think that we should move forward and make sure that we have the
groundwork for a program that allows, as President Bush has stated,
those who work hard, play by the rules, to come out of the darkness and
come out of the shadows and come forward.
I do not think we should criminalize it at any level. We have
administrative review now. We have civil penalties. We have a process.
And I do not see why we should change that process, if indeed, as the
chairman has said and so many people have said, that, next year, we are
coming back to fix this thing.
Well, let us not cause any interruptions in fixing this thing. I said
we should not criminalize this in the first place just on principle. We
have civil statutes that deal with this.
So I stand, and the Hispanic Congressional Caucus has unanimously
adopted a position to stand against this motion and this amendment in
particular.
Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of
the time to the gentleman from California (Mr. Berman) for the purpose
of entering into a brief colloquy.
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
I want to understand the state of play. If this amendment goes to a
vote, a recorded vote, then am I to understand that the chairman and
the Republican leadership has offered a tough bill and now they are
asking their colleagues on the majority side to soften the criminal
penalties for illegal immigration?
Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. We will soon discover.
The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mr. Hayes). The question is on the amendment
offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the
ayes appeared to have it.
Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded
vote.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin
will be postponed.
Amendment No. 8 Offered by Ms. Velazquez
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 8 printed in House Report 109-350 offered by
Ms. Velazquez:
At the end of title II, insert the following:
SEC. 211. REDUCTION IN IMMIGRATION BACKLOG.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall
require that, not later than six months after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Director of United States
Citizenship and Immigration Services (in this section
referred to as ``USCIS'') undertake maximum efforts to reduce
to the greatest extent practicable the backlog in the
processing and adjudicative functions of USCIS.
(b) Pilot Program Initiatives.--
(1) In general.--The Director is authorized to implement a
pilot program for the purposes of, to the greatest extent
practicable--
(A) reducing the backlog in the processing of immigration
benefit applications; and
(B) preventing such backlog from recurring.
(2) Initiatives.--To carry out paragraph (1), initiatives
may include measures such as increasing personnel,
transferring personnel to focus on areas with the largest
potential for backlog, streamlining paperwork processes, and
increasing information technology and service centers.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 621, the
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez) and a Member opposed each
will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, I offer this amendment at a time when our immigration
system continues to fail America's hardworking families, at a time when
immigration laws continue to separate our Nation's families and at a
time when our country is so desperately seeking fair and comprehensive
immigration reform.
Millions of close family members continue to languish in a wearisome
visa backlog process for years waiting to be reunited with their loved
ones. The seemingly endless application process creates desperation and
homelessness for hardworking immigrants in a Nation where we hear so
much about family values being a priority. We must provide relief for
these families struggling to be together.
Beginning in fiscal year 2002, President Bush proposed a $500 million
initiative to eliminate the immigration processing backlog and attain a
universal 6-month processing time standard for all immigration
applicants within 5 years.
While this initiative has helped to reduce the backlog, the Goverment
Accountability Office estimates that, as of June 30, 2005, USCIS still
had 1.2 million cases in its backlog, and the agency was unlikely to
meet the September 2006 deadline of a 6-month turnaround time for
applications.
In my congressional district, we continue to have backlogged cases of
over a year despite the President's proposed 6-month time standard.
Elsewhere in the country, there are people waiting up to 22 years for
their applications to be processed. What is most alarming about the
cases in my district is that the individuals have been mistakenly
identified by the USCIS as naturalized when in fact they are not.
Not only does this create an unnecessary backlog, it poses a national
security concern. My amendment, which has previously passed the House,
will help address this issue. The amendment will enable the Department
of Homeland Security to explore new ways of tackling this problem by
authorizing the director of the USCIS to implement innovative pilot
initiatives to eliminate the immigration application processing backlog
and prevent further backlog from occurring.
{time} 1630
It would encourage initiatives such as increasing or transferring
personnel to areas with the greatest backlog, streamlining regulations
and paperwork filing processes, upgrading information technology, and
increasing immigration service centers throughout the country.
This amendment recognizes that there is not one specific approach
toward eliminating the backlog, and therefore it encourages flexibility
at the local level so pilot project sites can examine the problem in
new ways. Children should not be left without the guidance of both of
their parents as they face the joys and trials of school life, building
friendships, and discovering their individual talents.
Mothers and fathers should not be denied the chance to watch their
children grow up into young men and women, moving on to having children
of their own. And couples should not be separated, leaving one parent
struggling to make ends meet and serve the needs of
[[Page H11954]]
their children alone. We must help reunite families and ensure that
immigrant families have the same opportunities as native-born families
to live and work together as a complete family unit.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in
opposition, even though I support the amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mr. Hayes). Without objection, the gentleman is
recognized.
There was no objection.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I support this amendment, and I want
to commend the gentlewoman from New York for offering it.
One can ask all 435 Members of the House of Representatives what is
the principal area of constituent complaints that caseworkers in our
local offices deal with, and they will all say immigration complaints,
because the immigration service legacy, as well as the component parts
that it has been split into, has not been dealing with these issues
properly.
This is an issue that deals with immigration benefits that legal
aliens are entitled to receive. And it seems to me that if we are the
welcoming country to legal aliens that we claim to be, we ought to deal
with their petitions promptly and professionally. That is not being
done, and we owe it to our present constituents and future
constituents, as many of these people are eligible for permanent
resident status and will eventually become citizens of the United
States, to solve the problems of the backlog in dealing with
immigration benefits.
The Government Accountability Office is about to issue a report that
will deal with the effects of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Services to reduce the immigration application backlog that has plagued
the system for years. This report will confirm that this new agency,
created under the Homeland Security Act and transformed from the old
Immigration and Naturalization Service, has made significant strides in
reducing application backlogs since its creation in 2003.
Nevertheless, more progress needs to be made. The current backlog
stands at about 1 million applications for immigration benefits.
Although this figure was reduced from over 3 million applications when
the new agency was formed, much of this came from definitional changes
which I have publicly questioned. We must do more to challenge the
Department of Homeland Security to improve. This will mean a more
professional and prompt resolution of dealing with the documents that
legal immigrants need to integrate themselves into American society.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Berman).
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman
from California (Mr. Berman).
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me an
additional minute.
To follow up, I support very strongly the Velazquez amendment, and I
am glad that the chairman and the majority support it as well. It is
very important. But as I look at the bill, I find an issue that will
take a higher precedence than the problem of the backlog in terms of
our constituents and in terms of our congressional offices and I think
will put that far in the background in terms of things that most bother
them, because under the Alien Smuggling and Related Offenses provision
of the bill that we will be asked to vote on, anyone who assists,
encourages, directs, or induces a person to reside in or to attempt to
reside in or remain in the United States, knowing or in reckless
disregard of the fact that such person is an alien who lacks lawful
authority to reside or remain in the United States, is subject to
penalties of up to 5 years in jail if it is not for commercial
purposes. If it is for commercial purposes, understandably, it would be
tougher sentences.
So when a person calls my district office and talks to my
congressional staff and says, I was here on a temporary visa, the date
passed, I have an immigration petition pending, is there anything I can
do? if my office assists that person or suggests that person go see a
lawyer and perhaps if my assistant does not call the Department of
Homeland Security and tell them to pick that person up, my staffer,
potentially, is subject to criminal penalties. Congressional staff do
not have congressional immunity. That means I am going to have to do
all the casework in my district office. I think we need a little
correction of the base bill in this particular area of alien smuggling.
We are sweeping very widely here.
With that, I urge adoption of this amendment.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mr. Norwood
Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 9 printed in House Report 109-350 offered by
Mr. Norwood:
At the end of title II, add the following new sections:
SEC. 211. FEDERAL AFFIRMATION OF ASSISTANCE IN THE
IMMIGRATION LAW ENFORCEMENT BY STATES AND
POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS OF STATES.
(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law
and reaffirming the existing inherent authority of States,
law enforcement personnel of a State or a political
subdivision of a State have the inherent authority of a
sovereign entity to investigate, identify, apprehend, arrest,
detain, or transfer to Federal custody aliens in the United
States (including the transportation of such aliens across
State lines to detention centers), for the purposes of
assisting in the enforcement of the immigration laws of the
United States in the course of carrying out routine duties.
This State authority has never been displaced or preempted by
Congress.
(b) Construction.--Nothing in this section may be construed
to require law enforcement personnel of a State or political
subdivision of a State to--
(1) report the identity of a victim of, or a witness to, a
criminal offense to the Secretary of Homeland Security for
immigration enforcement purposes; or
(2) arrest such victim or witness for a violation of the
immigration laws of the United States.
SEC. 212. TRAINING OF STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT
PERSONNEL RELATING TO THE ENFORCEMENT OF
IMMIGRATION LAWS.
(a) Establishment of Training Manual and Pocket Guide.--Not
later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish--
(1) a training manual for law enforcement personnel of a
State or political subdivision of a State to train such
personnel in the investigation, identification, apprehension,
arrest, detention, and transfer to Federal custody of aliens
in the United States (including the transportation of such
aliens across State lines to detention centers and the
identification of fraudulent documents); and
(2) an immigration enforcement pocket guide for law
enforcement personnel of a State or political subdivision of
a State to provide a quick reference for such personnel in
the course of duty.
(b) Availability.--The training manual and pocket guide
established in accordance with subsection (a) shall be made
available to all State and local law enforcement personnel.
(c) Applicability.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to require State or local law enforcement personnel
to carry the training manual or pocket guide established
under subsection (a)(2) with them while on duty.
(d) Costs.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall be
responsible for any and all costs incurred in establishing
the training manual and pocket guide under subsection (a).
(e) Training Flexibility.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall
make training of State and local law enforcement officers
available through as many means as possible, including
residential training at the Center for Domestic Preparedness,
onsite training held at State or local police agencies or
facilities, online training courses by computer,
teleconferencing, and videotape, or the digital video display
(DVD) of a training course or courses. E-learning through a
secure, encrypted distributed learning system that has all
its servers based in the United States, is sealable,
survivable, and can have a portal in place within 30 days,
shall be made available by the Federal Law Enforcement
Training Center Distributed Learning Program for State and
local law enforcement personnel.
[[Page H11955]]
(2) Federal personnel training.--The training of State and
local law enforcement personnel under this section shall not
displace the training of Federal personnel.
(3) Clarification.--Nothing in this Act or any other
provision of law shall be construed as making any
immigration-related training a requirement for, or
prerequisite to, any State or local law enforcement officer
to assist in the enforcement of Federal immigration laws in
the normal course of carrying out their normal law
enforcement duties.
(f) Training Limitation.--Section 287(g) of the Immigration
and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1357(g)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``Attorney General'' and inserting
``Secretary of Homeland Security'' each place it appears; and
(2) in paragraph (2), by adding at the end the following:
``Such training shall not exceed 14 days or 80 hours,
whichever is longer.''.
SEC. 213. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO STATE AND LOCAL POLICE
AGENCIES THAT ASSIST IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF
IMMIGRATION LAWS.
(a) Grants for Special Equipment for Housing and Processing
Illegal Aliens.--From amounts made available to make grants
under this section, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall
make grants to States and political subdivisions of States
for procurement of equipment, technology, facilities, and
other products that facilitate and are directly related to
investigating, apprehending, arresting, detaining, or
transporting immigration law violators, including additional
administrative costs incurred under this Act.
(b) Eligibility.--To be eligible to receive a grant under
this section, a State or political subdivision of a State
must have the authority to, and have in effect the policy and
practice to, assist in the enforcement of the immigration
laws of the United States in the course of carrying out such
agency's routine law enforcement duties.
(c) Funding.--There is authorized to be appropriated for
grants under this section $250,000,000 for each fiscal year.
(d) GAO Audit.--Not later than 3 years after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the
United States shall conduct an audit of funds distributed to
States and political subdivisions of States under subsection
(a).
SEC. 214. INSTITUTIONAL REMOVAL PROGRAM (IRP).
(a) Continuation and Expansion.--
(1) In general.--The Department of Homeland Security shall
continue to operate and implement the program known as the
Institutional Removal Program (IRP) which--
(A) identifies removable criminal aliens in Federal and
State correctional facilities;
(B) ensures such aliens are not released into the
community; and
(C) removes such aliens from the United States after the
completion of their sentences.
(2) Expansion.--The institutional removal program shall be
extended to all States. Any State that receives Federal funds
for the incarceration of criminal aliens shall--
(A) cooperate with officials of the institutional removal
program;
(B) expeditiously and systematically identify criminal
aliens in its prison and jail populations; and
(C) promptly convey such information to officials of such
program as a condition for receiving such funds.
(b) Authorization for Detention After Completion of State
or Local Prison Sentence.--Law enforcement officers of a
State or political subdivision of a State have the authority
to--
(1) hold an illegal alien for a period of up to 14 days
after the alien has completed the alien's State prison
sentence in order to effectuate the transfer of the alien to
Federal custody when the alien is removable or not lawfully
present in the United States; or
(2) issue a detainer that would allow aliens who have
served a State prison sentence to be detained by the State
prison until personnel from United States Immigration and
Customs Enforcement can take the alien into custody.
(c) Technology Usage.--Technology such as video
conferencing shall be used to the maximum extent possible in
order to make the Institutional Removal Program (IRP)
available in remote locations. Mobile access to Federal
databases of aliens, such as IDENT, and live scan technology
shall be used to the maximum extent practicable in order to
make these resources available to State and local law
enforcement agencies in remote locations.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out the institutional removal
program--
(1) $100,000,000 for fiscal year 2007;
(2) $115,000,000 for fiscal year 2008;
(3) $130,000,000 for fiscal year 2009;
(4) $145,000,000 for fiscal year 2010; and
(5) $160,000,000 for fiscal year 2011.
SEC. 215. STATE CRIMINAL ALIEN ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (SCAAP).
Section 241(i)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1231(i)) is amended by inserting before the period at
the end the following: ``and $1,000,000,000 for each
subsequent fiscal year''.
SEC. 216. STATE AUTHORIZATION FOR ASSISTANCE IN THE
ENFORCEMENT OF IMMIGRATION LAWS ENCOURAGED.
(a) In General.--Effective 2 years after the date of the
enactment of this Act, a State (or political subdivision of a
State) that has in effect a statute, policy, or practice that
prohibits law enforcement officers of the State, or of a
political subdivision within the State, from assisting or
cooperating with Federal immigration law enforcement in the
course of carrying out the officers' routine law enforcement
duties shall not receive any of the funds that would
otherwise be allocated to the State under section 241(i) of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1231(i)).
(b) Construction.--Nothing in this section shall require
law enforcement officials from States or political
subdivisions of States to report or arrest victims or
witnesses of a criminal offense.
(c) Reallocation of Funds.--Any funds that are not
allocated to a State or political subdivision of a State due
to the failure of the State to comply with subsection (a)
shall be reallocated to States that comply with such
subsection.
At the end of title IV, add the following new section:
SEC. 408. LISTING OF IMMIGRATION VIOLATORS IN THE NATIONAL
CRIME INFORMATION CENTER DATABASE.
(a) Provision of Information to the NCIC.--Not later than
180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Under Secretary for Border and Transportation Security of the
Department of Homeland Security shall provide the National
Crime Information Center of the Department of Justice with
such information as the Under Secretary may have on any and
all aliens against whom a final order of removal has been
issued, any and all aliens who have signed a voluntary
departure agreement, any and all aliens who have overstayed
their authorized period of stay, and any and all aliens whose
visas have been revoked. Such information shall be provided
to the National Crime Information Center, and the National
Crime Information Center shall enter such information into
the Immigration Violators File of the National Crime
Information Center database, regardless of whether--
(1) the alien received notice of a final order of removal;
(2) the alien has already been removed; or
(3) sufficient identifying information is available on the
alien.
(b) Inclusion of Information in the NCIC Database.--Section
534(a) of title 28, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (3), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (5); and
(3) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following:
``(4) acquire, collect, classify, and preserve records of
violations of the immigration laws of the United States,
regardless of whether the alien has received notice of the
violation or whether sufficient identifying information is
available on the alien and even if the alien has already been
removed; and
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 621, the gentleman
from Georgia (Mr. Norwood) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr.
Conyers) each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.
Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Chairman Sensenbrenner, Chairman King,
the Speaker, and the Rules Committee for allowing me to bring this
amendment.
It is part of the CLEAR Act that we have been trying to pass for many
years. We have passed many parts of it. In fact, the majority of the
people in this body have voted for parts of it in the past, but we
bring it today for the Members' consideration to do one thing: we are
simply trying, as I have discussed this over and over with Chairman
King, we are trying in this amendment to direct local law enforcement
to help us apprehend the 500,000 illegal immigrants in this country who
are criminals who are under deportation orders from the American
courts. And I point out to the Members, Mr. Chairman, that 100,000 of
those are very violent criminals. That is the purpose of what we are
trying to do. I look forward to a bipartisan support on this.
Many Democrats in here have complained the underlying bill does
nothing to deal with criminal illegal aliens. This amendment does. Many
Democrats have complained that there is nothing in here that helps
local law enforcement. This amendment does. So I feel sure we will have
a very good vote on this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment. This Norwood No.
65 amendment includes a number of provisions of the CLEAR Act; and in
addition to giving State and local police the same authority to enforce
immigration laws as a Federal agent, the provisions do not require, as
a matter
[[Page H11956]]
of fact limit, the amount of training that they could receive in order
to enforce these rather technical provisions.
Moreover, the provisions require the entry of millions of civil
immigration law violators into the National Crime Information Center,
an FBI database of those who are wanted; and these entries go on
thousands of times each day.
I am just wondering if my colleague, the author of this amendment, is
aware of the incredible complexity that he is suggesting now be
included in this measure. If these categories were limited to wanted
criminals, that would be one consideration. However, the list includes
millions of people with technical status violations that are fluid and
easily remedied, and we would be creating, I think, in my judgment, an
administrative nightmare.
We have a lot of examples. But let me just close by saying that local
police have more than enough work to do hunting down the people that
are law violators. But entering the names of people with minor status
problems into a criminal database would overwhelm it and mix those who
may be legal and those who are not criminals with the rest who are. It
exposes to liability for unlawful arrests. It discourages immigrants
from working with local law enforcement. And those are the reasons I
have serious reservations about this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), our chairman.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding
me this time.
This amendment clarifies the inherent authority of State and local
law enforcement officers to enforce the immigration law and provides
reimbursement to those States and localities for their assistance. Most
importantly, it provides a means for Federal, State, and local law
enforcement officers to work together to apprehend, detain, and remove
illegal aliens.
The fact is that at the present time there are only 2,000 special
agents to locate and arrest the entire illegal alien population
nationwide. The Norwood amendment would allow State and local officers
who are willing to do so to be a force multiplier for those 2,000
agents.
It is a good amendment and should be adopted.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from California (Mr. Berman).
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time.
There is an interesting juxtaposition going on between the
gentleman's amendment and the base bill. The gentleman says something
that I think is very important: we have got to prioritize. The priority
in a country where there are 10, 11 million people who are here without
status and under this bill and would, therefore, becoming guilty of a
criminal offense, he says let us get the 500,000, whatever number it
is, who have committed crimes of violence and economic crimes and
murder and drug dealing and all these things. And he is right. No one
can disagree. That should be the most urgent priority.
But in a universe where you have criminalized all 11 million, you
have lost our ability to do that. So what is so funny about the
argument for the gentleman's amendment is that in the context of this,
all 11 million, it is the flip side of where some people have to wear a
band designating it and the way of protesting that is everybody wear
the band. You have lost your ability to prioritize.
Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I yield for the purpose of making a
unanimous consent request to the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr.
Bass).
Mr. BASS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment.
I stand today in strong support of the Norwood Amendment, which will
provide State and local law enforcement the necessary authority,
resources, and intelligence needed to apprehend and detain illegal
aliens that they encounter during their routine duties. The President
in his recent comprehensive immigration strategy has called for an
elimination of ``catch-and-release'' at our national border and it
essential that this is expanded to include incidents within the
interior of the country.
Over 400,000 alien absconders and more than 85,000 criminal illegal
aliens are in our country. Tragically, many of these criminal aliens
remain loose within our borders and continue to commit violent crimes
in our neighborhoods, such as Eduardo Campos Rodriquez, an illegal
immigrant wanted for four counts of murder and two counts of attempted
murder. We can not allow cases like this to continue to threaten the
safety of our citizens in their communities.
Illegal immigration is a national problem--not one only occurring in
the communities along the southern border. Throughout the country,
State and local law enforcement are confronted with this problem
everyday from large urban cities to the smallest and most rural
communities. Unfortunately, our State and local law enforcement
officers lack the critical information, necessary resources, and clear
authority to detain and process these individuals. Recently, my
district has been in the national spotlight concerning the various
strategies that local and State law enforcement are attempting to use
to address their illegal immigration problem in the absence of federal
guidance. Recent incidents in New Ipswich, New Hampshire and Hudson,
New Hampshire forced police officers to release illegal aliens whom
they had detained during the course of their normal duties due to a
lack of assistance from Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials.
In response to having to repeatedly release illegal aliens, the towns'
law enforcement officers attempted to apply New Hampshire trespassing
laws to these illegal aliens, so they would have the authority to
detain the individuals for a longer period of time in hopes that ICE
would then be able to take custody. Even though this strategy has not
held up in the courts, it illustrates the need for this essential
amendment to give law enforcement the authority, resources, and
intelligence to respond to the unique challenges presented by illegal
aliens. It is important to point out these incidents happen in
relatively small communities--the town of Hudson with a population of
24,000 and the town of New Ipswich with a population of 5,000.
Overall, State and local law enforcement are looking to Congress to
provide them with the vital resources, information and authority to
address this serious security concern. I strongly believe that the
nation's security must remain our highest priority, and local
involvement in security solutions is critical to achieving this goal.
Therefore, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the Norwood
amendment.
Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Georgia (Mr. Deal), who has worked on immigration issues for a long
time.
{time} 1645
Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my colleague for
bringing this amendment and for yielding me time. He brings an
important aspect of enforcement to the table, and that is interior
enforcement.
Many people believe that only the problem exists along the border,
and that is not true. My State of Georgia, Congressman Norwood's State
of Georgia, is one of the fastest growing in terms of population of
illegal aliens in the country. In fact, in my congressional district in
north Georgia, two of the five fastest growing populations of illegal
immigrants are in my congressional district.
Now, if we want to get serious about enforcement, let us look at what
the facts are. You heard Congressman Norwood say there are 500,000
criminal aliens in our country that are waiting to be apprehended. In
our State of Georgia, one of the fastest growing in illegal populations
in the country, I am told we only have three enforcement agents. In our
adjoining State of Alabama, they only have one.
Are we really serious? Why not tap into the 700,000 State and local
law enforcement officers who are available and trained to enforce the
law.
Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, let me just point out that if you wish to vote against
this bill, you are basically saying that you want to allow 500,000
criminal illegal aliens to stay on the street because 2,000 Federal
officers simply are not going to remove them. It is impossible. It
takes the 700,000 local law enforcement people out on the streets to
help get this done, and we need to fund this. This amendment does that.
This amendment adds funding for SCAT, which is money needed
desperately by the cities who deal with so many illegal immigrants.
Lastly and very importantly, it directs Homeland Security to put in
[[Page H11957]]
place in all 50 States the Institutional Removable Program. Now, you
want to vote against this? How about us sending a rapist to prison in
this country and INS is not there to deport them the minute they get
out? No, they turn them loose on our State. This very thing has
happened in Georgia with a pedophile.
This amendment is a reasonable aspect of this bill that brings
resources to the table, and it brings law enforcement, the people who
can solve this problem, to help us out.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I think the author of the amendment will rest more
comfortably tonight when he finds that not only do the people that he
described that do not want this amendment are joined by numerous State
and local police departments across the Nation, but also scores of
groups that work with victims of domestic violence.
The proponents of this amendment must understand that there is
nothing in this bill to ensure that ICE or SCAT in Homeland Security
will be able to respond to the millions of requests from local police
to pick up low-priority civil law violators.
Remember what the gentleman from California (Mr. Berman) said: you
cannot dump millions of people into this database and think it is going
to work. It will not. Turn down the amendment.
Mr. McCAUL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this
amendment. My hometown of Austin has seen the horrifying effects that a
sanctuary policy can have on a community.
Nearly two years ago an 18-year-old woman named Jenny Garcia was
found brutally stabbed to death in her Northwest Austin home.
An illegal alien by the name of David Diaz Morales was one of Jenny's
coworkers. He made it clear to her that he wanted to be more than just
her coworker or friend. When Jenny rejected his advances, this put
David Diaz Morales into a murderous rage.
On January 26th of last year, Morales broke into Jenny's home,
forcefully grabbed her, held her down, savagely raped her and then
brutally stabbed her to death.
In less than 24 hours, the Austin Police Department arrested this 20
year old thug who had absolutely no business being in the United
States, let alone Jenny's home.
However, David Diaz Morales had no business being free to walk the
streets either. You see, before becoming Jenny's murderer, he had been
previously arrested for molesting a child in Austin.
Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle decided not to prosecute
Morales's molestation case. Instead, he let him out of jail to commit
more violent crimes, and when it came to Morales's immigration status
District Attorney Ronnie Earle looked the other way.
If only District Attorney Earle had picked up the phone, he would
have discovered that Morales was in our country illegally. He could
have contacted immigration officials who would have deported him out of
our country. He could have saved Jenny's life.
This is one horrific example of many injustices which could have been
prevented. That is why we must include this vital amendment to the
underlying bill. This amendment will put $1 billion in the State
Criminal Alien Assistance Program, and make the Institutional Removal
Program, which identifies criminal illegal aliens, mandatory. It also
gives states, counties and cities 2 full years to come into compliance
or risk losing State Criminal Alien Assistance Program funds.
Mr. Chairman, we owe it to victims like Jenny Garcia and so many
others to include this language in the underlying bill, and I strongly
urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mr. Hayes). The question is on the amendment
offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Norwood).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the
ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia will
be postponed.
Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Tancredo
Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 10 printed in House Report 109-350 offered by
Mr. Tancredo of Colorado:
At the end of title III, add the following:
SEC. 308. PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF FEDERAL IMMIGRATION
LAWS BY STATES AND LOCALITIES.
Section 241(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1231(i)) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(7) Prior to entering into a contractual arrangement with
a State or political subdivision under paragraph (1), the
Attorney General shall determine whether such State or
political subdivision has in place any formal or informal
policy that violates section 642 of the Illegal Immigration
Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C.
1373). The Attorney General shall not enter into a
contractual arrangement with, or allocate any of the funds
made available under this section to, any State or political
subdivision with a policy that violates such section. The
Attorney General shall submit to Congress an annual report on
any State or political subdivision with a policy that
violates such section.''.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 621, the gentleman
from Colorado (Mr. Tancredo) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado.
Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, we have had a lot of debate on this bill, of course,
over, I don't know, the last 24 hours it seems like or more; and it has
oftentimes been punctuated with the use of the word ``comprehensive''
and people complaining about the fact that they do not think it is
comprehensive, or at least comprehensive enough. But that has been a
euphemism most of the time for the phrase ``guest worker.'' That is
what people want in this bill in order to make it ``comprehensive.''
Let me suggest to you it would do nothing, absolutely nothing, to
make this bill comprehensive. A bill designed to deal with border
security and internal enforcement of our laws in no way helps us
accomplish those goals by including anything like a guest worker
program.
Hence, I believe that this bill, as it was written and as it has been
amended, and hopefully with the amendments that are going to be
accepted at the end of the discussion of the bill, I believe it has
become a comprehensive bill. Not totally comprehensive. There are
certainly things I would like to see in it. Congressman Deal's issue of
birthright citizenship, I wish that were in there, and a couple of
other things that we will continue to work on. But to a great extent,
it begins, for the first time, to actually deal with a problem in what
I think is a comprehensive way, and I mean it in this form.
We have a supply and a demand problem. The supply problem is coming
across the border. We are in this bill doing something very specific
about that with the inclusion of the amendment, with the passage of the
amendment, to build some barrier along at lease 700 miles of our
southern border. I hope we continue with that, by the way, along the
entire border, to the extent it is feasible, and the northern border we
could start next. That is dealing with the supply side of this problem.
The demand side of the problem is, of course, the job magnet that is
created by people here who provide jobs for people who come across the
border illegally, and in many cases do so knowingly. And I want to
commend the Speaker of the House, I want to commend the leadership of
my party, I want to commend the chairman of this committee, and I want
to commend my colleagues on this side of the aisle for doing something
that is difficult.
We are going up against economic interests that are extremely
powerful. Many of them, of course, have been supporters of Republicans
for years, the Chamber of Commerce and the rest. We have actually said
to them, you know what, we are going to put our Nation's security and
the importance of border security above all of these other issues and
above the economic interests you bring to bear because so many of you
are making so much money off illegal aliens. You are exploiting them.
We know that this is happening, and we are going to try to put a stop
to it, because in this bill we actually have something called internal
enforcement.
We are going to do something about employer enforcement of the law.
We are going to give them the opportunity and the tools to do that.
[[Page H11958]]
Again, I wish it were better. I wish we had a shorter period of time
for the law, for checking the Social Security numbers to go into
effect. But, nonetheless, it is there. We have made enormous strides
with this bill, enormous, I must admit to you more than I had
anticipated we could do, certainly, in this term of the Congress. But I
am happy that we are here.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Culberson).
Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Chairman, I want to show the American people what
a typical day looks like for a law enforcement officer on the southern
border. This is the result of an arrest that took place in Nuevo Loredo
and this is what the sheriffs are facing. This is what our Border
Patrol is facing: 40 millimeter grenade launchers, 12 of them captured;
10,000 rounds of ammunition; 40 AK-47 rifles. These are carried by
individuals, paramilitary commandos, who are trained to kill anybody
who stops and attempts to intercept them.
These are 40 millimeter grenades that are taped up with adhesive tape
designed to be put on top of a warm engine, and as the glue softens,
the tape comes off and the grenade explodes. This is a sniper rifle
carried by the narcoterrorist commandos that shoots around corners. It
has a television screen and a silencer on it.
This is the level of sophistication of these people that our sheriffs
are facing. These narcoterrorists are so bold, Mr. Chairman, and the
lawlessness is so pervasive on the border that the narcoterrorists have
set up, according to the FBI, at least one narcoterrorist training camp
outside of Matamoros operating in the open, run by the zadas to train
gun runners, human smugglers, smugglers who pay cash, who keep their
mouths shut. They can go to this training camp outside of Matamoros and
they will be carried into the United States. There may be three others
operating just across the river from the United States in the open.
This is a law and order issue that the United States must deal with
through our locally elected law enforcement officials and the Border
Patrol.
I thank the chairman for bringing this bill to the House.
Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, I intend to withdraw the amendment. The issue that I
was bringing to the table with regard to this sanctuary city has been
dealt with to a significant extent by my colleague, Mr. Campbell, from
California. In that light, I will in fact withdraw my amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Colorado?
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, reserving the right to object, and I do not
intend to object, I wanted to simply point out to my friend from
Colorado that before he praises this legislation too much, he should
make sure there really is a strategy to turn it into a law, because I
am very skeptical that you will ever see this bill coming back from
here, very skeptical. If I had to bet, I would bet these provisions
which you like and which you think make this into an attractive
proposition and a serious attempt will never be seen again.
I simply want to add one other point: one day I would like you to
explain to me how the employee verification system, which I think, like
you do, is a critical part of dealing with the problem of illegal
immigration, will ever get implemented in the context of 10, 11, 12
million people in this country in unauthorized status.
Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BERMAN. I yield to the gentleman from Colorado.
Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman knows that I have often
approached this particular issue with a certain degree of cynicism,
perhaps the same amount as he is expressing right now in terms of its
prospects.
All I know is this: this is what I have before me today. This is what
this House is being asked to address and to accomplish. That one thing,
if nothing else happens, I am happy to have been able to get it to this
point.
I am truly hopeful, and I recognize full well the gentleman is right
that there are major obstacles to getting this beyond this point, but
that is a fight to fight tomorrow. Today we are here, it is a good
bill, and I certainly hope that we can pass it.
Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, without accepting the gentleman's
assumptions about the worthiness of the bill, I withdraw my reservation
of objection.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
There was no objection.
Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. Nadler
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 11 printed in House Report 109-350 offered by
Mr. Nadler:
Strike section 407.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 621, the gentleman
from New York (Mr. Nadler) and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr.
Sensenbrenner) each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes.
Mr. Chairman, my amendment strikes section 407. Section 407 expands
the controversial policy of expedited removal, which grants
extraordinary power to low-level immigration officers to order deported
without any judicial review and without any fair hearing people who
arrive at ports of entry without proper documentation.
This section would authorize such unreviewable deportation decisions,
again without any real judicial review, for anyone picked up within 100
miles of any U.S. border, not just at ports of entry or near the
Mexican border. My amendment would prevent this expansion of expedited
removal and limit its use to the present locations.
If the amendment passes, we would still, of course, deport illegal
aliens; but people arrested within the U.S. would continue to have the
right to some judicial review, some due process before being deported.
They would have the right, as they do now, to challenge the decision of
the Border Patrol agent.
By imposing expedited removal proceedings on all aliens apprehended
within 100 miles of any border, this bill would deny thousands of
people all due process rights.
{time} 1700
The expedited removal process poses the gravest risks to refugees
fleeing human rights abuses. Those fleeing torture, imprisonment or
other forms of persecution are often forced to travel without valid
documents because there is not enough time to obtain them or because it
is too dangerous to apply for them.
Those fleeing persecution or the Gestapo or the KGB or the Savak are
least likely to have properly notarized and stamped documents,
countersigned by the Gestapo, the KGB or the Savak.
The expansion of the expedited removal process puts refugee women and
children fleeing rape, honor killings, female mutilation, forced
marriages and sexual slavery particularly at risk because these victims
have the most difficulty sharing and explaining their painful stories
to border agents who may not be experts in foreign cultures.
Furthermore, when individuals are placed in expedited removal, they
do not have access to relief from deportation under the Violence
Against Women Act, the temporary protected status or as trafficking
victims.
My amendment seeks to prevent the inevitable consequences of
deporting more asylum seekers, battered immigrants, trafficking victims
and others who may be legally entitled to remain but who have no real
opportunity for any appeal from the hasty judgment of the border agent,
no due process.
Even as currently applied, expedited removal has resulted in terrible
mistakes, including its wrongful application to genuine refugees and
even to U.S. citizens. The Senate heard the case of Sharon McKnight, an
American citizen from New York of Jamaican descent who suffers a mental
disability and was wrongly put into expedited removal and sent to
Jamaica because an inspector mistakenly thought her passport was fake.
Expanding this policy to include persons already within the United
States
[[Page H11959]]
poses grave constitutional problems. Immigration laws long made a
distinction between those aliens seeking admission to the U.S. and
those who are already within the U.S., regardless of the legality of
their entry. In Zadvydas v. Davis, the Supreme Court held ``once an
alien enters the country, the legal status changes, for the Due Process
Clause applies to all `persons' within the United States, including
aliens, whether their presence here is lawful, unlawful, temporary or
permanent.''
Because there is no check or review of expedited removal decisions,
there is no due process. This policy should not be expanded. It should
be left where it is as my amendment would do.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment which would
strike the provision added by the bill the gentleman from California
(Mr. Daniel E. Lungren), mandating expedited removal for other than
Mexican aliens apprehended after entering illegally within 14 days and
100 hundred miles of entry.
Unlike what the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler) said, the
Lungren provision in this bill applies to land borders only, and it
would not apply to asylum seekers who ask for asylum at the time they
enter through a port of entry.
The provision that this amendment would strike is crucial to ending
the current practice of catch and release of aliens along the southern
border. While nationals of Mexico who are apprehended along the
southern border can be returned to Mexico, the nationals of other
countries cannot. Rather these aliens, known as OTMs, must be placed in
removal proceedings which is a process that can take months. Because of
a lack of detention space, most are released on the promise that they
will show up for their adjudication.
Experience has shown that if OTMs are released to attend their
removal proceedings, they will likely disappear. Of the 8,908 notices
to appear at the immigration court at Harlingen, Texas, issued last
year to OTMs, 8,767 failed to show up for their hearings, according to
the statistics compiled by the Justice Departments's Executive Office
of Immigration Review.
The fact that these aliens were able to enter illegally, be released
and then disappear into society has encouraged even more OTMs to
illegally enter. Arrests of non-Mexicans along the U.S.-Mexico border,
which total 14,935 in 1995 and 28,598 in 2000, rose to 65,814 in fiscal
year 2004.
As nationals of these countries have entered with impunity, they have
encouraged others to do so also. The Lungren provision addresses the
problem of catch and release by requiring DHS to remove these OTMs who
are apprehended within 14 days of entry and 100 miles of the border
through expedited procedures. This codifies DHS's current practices. By
limiting the amount of time that aliens are in proceedings, these
procedures allow DHS to use its limited detention space more
effectively. This in turn ensures that more aliens can be detained,
which discourages other aliens from attempting to enter illegally.
I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, the real question here is due process. We all want to
deport illegal aliens. We all want to deport people who are not here
legally. But the question is because the Border Control agent thinks
that someone may not be here legally, because he thinks that the
passport is fake, should there be no appeal? Should there be no ability
to show facts? Should there be no due process?
This country is built on due process. This country is built on a
foundation of liberty and proper process.
The Department of Homeland Security states that expedited procedures
currently cannot be applied to the nearly 1 million aliens who are
apprehended annually on the southwest border, where it can legally be
applied, as it is not possible to initiate formal removal proceedings
against all the aliens.
So you cannot use it in too many of the cases where it is legal now,
so let us expand it so we cannot use it in millions of more cases.
Mr. Chairman, I realize that we have to talk about the principle of
due process. I also realize that not passing this amendment is going to
result in a fiction, the fiction of having this policy where we cannot
use it for millions of people. So I am not sure what the practical
impact of that will be.
I recognize there is no point to spending more time on this. I wanted
to make the point about due process, and I hope the Senate will listen.
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mr. Culberson). Is there objection to the
request of the gentleman from New York?
There was no objection.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now
rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Hayes) having assumed the chair, Mr. Culberson, Acting Chairman of the
Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 4437) to
amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to strengthen enforcement of
the immigration laws, to enhance border security, and for other
purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.
____________________