[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 37 (Wednesday, March 29, 2006)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2486-S2488]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           IMMIGRATION REFORM

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I always enjoy listening to my friend 
from Alabama. He has been very much involved and engaged in the 
discussion and debate on this issue in our Judiciary Committee. But I 
caution those watching this debate to examine his comments, where he 
said: ``Any individuals that came here illegally, this bill puts them 
automatically on a path for citizenship.'' That statement is 
categorically wrong. It does not. I will explain about the provisions 
of the legislation. I would not support that proposal. The members of 
the Judiciary Committee that supported the underlying legislation, the 
McCain-Kennedy legislation, don't support that proposal.
  We gather here today to begin debate on our effort to correct a great 
historic wrong.
  For decades, this country has turned a blind eye to the plight of the 
stranger in our midst, and looked away in indifference as undocumented 
immigrants have been exploited at the workplace and have been forced 
with their families to live in constant fear of detection and 
deportation.
  We have ignored the tough conditions endured by the undocumented, and 
the harmful ripple effects undocumented employment has on some U.S. 
workers. For decades Congress has failed to take sensible steps to end 
undocumented immigration, and some of our policy choices have even 
contributed to the current crisis.
  We first confronted this problem directly in 1952, passing a law 
known in the parlance of the time as the ``Wetback'' bill, which made 
it a crime to harbor or abet undocumented immigrants. But at the same 
time, over the vigorous objections of President Truman, Congress carved 
out the Texas Proviso--so called because it was drafted by agricultural 
producers from that State--which made it legal to employ undocumented 
immigrants. This decision protected the ``economic pull factors'' which 
have sustained illegal migration since that time.
  In 1961 the Edward R. Murrow documentary Harvest of Shame directed 
the Nation's attention to the miserable conditions under which migrant 
farm workers toiled to bring cheap fruit and vegetables to our table. 
Congress responded by terminating the deeply flawed Bracero guest-
worker program, and strict limits were imposed for the first time on 
labor migration from Mexico. I was part of that effort in the Senate to 
end that unacceptable and outrageously exploitive program. These 
changes to our immigration policy were well-intentioned, but with 
hindsight their result was predictable: by ending legal migration, but 
allowing employers to bid for immigrant labor, Congress all but 
guaranteed a generation of undocumented immigrants would emerge.
  Since that time, economic disparity between the U.S. and its 
neighbors increased, globalization made travel in and out of the U.S. 
easier, and two whole generations of foreign workers and U.S. employers 
came of age in an economic system organized around illegal migration.
  In truth, Congress has done little since then to confront this 
problem. In 1986 we passed the Immigration Reform and Control Act, but 
IRCA's employer sanctions provisions have never been enforced. Rather 
than confront the structural causes of undocumented immigration, 
Congress has repeatedly attacked the symptoms of this disease: building 
more fences and placing more agents at the U.S.-Mexican border, and 
imposing more restrictions on immigrants' legal rights. These blunt 
enforcement tools have not quenched employers' thirst for immigrant 
workers, and they have not given families the tools to be reunited with 
their loved ones. Instead, enforcement-only approaches have driven 
immigrants farther into the desert and deeper underground.
  For decades, we tolerated undocumented immigration because it seemed 
like a win-win exchange: employers and consumers were given access to 
cheap labor and low-cost goods and services; but Congress was not 
required to make politically difficult decisions

[[Page S2487]]

about expanding legal low-skilled immigration.
  But, of course, undocumented immigration has not been cost-free--far 
from it. And recent changes make continued indifference to this crisis 
impossible. Undocumented immigrants now live in every State in the 
Nation, and whole sectors of the economy--from construction, to food 
services, to health care, to agriculture--depend on undocumented 
workers to stay in business.
  Labor and business alike now demand a system in which workers' rights 
are respected and in which workers are no longer vulnerable to 
deportation.
  Millions of U.S. citizens now demand a system in which their 
husbands, wives, parents, children, and neighbors can plan for the 
future. And the continued health of the American economy demands a 
system in which all of these workers join the formal labor force, pay 
their taxes, and play by the rules.
  United States relations with Mexico and other countries of origin 
have also changed, and changed dramatically. In 1965, when the 
foundation for our current system was put in place, Mexico was an 
authoritarian state and barely a top 10 United States trade partner. 
Now Mexico is a flourishing democracy, a partner in the North American 
Free Trade Agreement, and our No. 2 trade partner in the world. Over 
300 million legal border crossings occur between the United States and 
Mexico each year, and trade across the border totals $650 million a 
day. Yet this relationship and our broader regional interests are 
jeopardized by this humanitarian crisis at the border and by the 
exploitation of immigrants within the United States.
  President Bush is traveling to Mexico this week, and the crisis of 
undocumented immigration, including the enormous strain it places on 
our partnership with Mexico, will be at the top of the agenda.
  And, of course, the 9/11 attacks remind us that undocumented 
immigration creates a crisis of insecurity. America spends billions of 
dollars tracking entries and exits at our ports of entry, but we have 
no idea about the identity of millions of immigrants already living 
among us. The vast majority of these undocumented immigrants are honest 
and hard-working, but our national security requires that we identify 
and monitor those who are not.
  We all agree that the time has come for Congress to act, but how 
shall we do so? Fundamentally, we must choose between two alternatives.
  Some would have us build higher and longer walls at the border. They 
would have us further restrict migrants' legal rights and make these 
hard-working men and women not just subject to deportation but also do 
time in U.S. prisons for the crime of living and working in this 
country. They would go much further, actually making felons of people 
such as Cardinal Mahoney and tens of thousands of other clergy and 
social workers who are offering counseling or humanitarian support to 
undocumented immigrants.
  Yet the United States lacks the resources or the political will to 
actually remove all of the 11 million undocumented immigrants among us. 
Doing so would cost $240 billion, it would wreak havoc with our 
economy, and it would destroy millions of American families. Nor in a 
global economy do we truly have the desire or the capacity to build an 
impenetrable wall around ourselves.
  The idea that blunt enforcement will disrupt this deeply entrenched 
system of undocumented immigration flies in the face of history and 
economics. Rather, this enforcement-only approach would simply 
replicate the policy failures of the past. Down this road lie further 
undocumented immigration, further insecurity, further economic 
polarization, and further exploitation of the poorest and most 
vulnerable among us.
  I must say, on the issue of the wall, all we have to do is look at 
our recent history. We have spent $20 billion over the last 10 years. 
We have a wall now that is 66 miles long. There are 1,800 more miles 
along the Mexican border, if we are talking about building walls. We 
have tripled the number of border guards, built the wall along the 
border, and we find the present system is not functioning or working. 
How many times do we have to learn that lesson, and how much more would 
it cost us if we go that particular route? It is a route that is 
unacceptable, expensive, and unworkable.
  We propose an alternative approach. We propose to end this system of 
exploitation and to right this historical injustice.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has used 12 minutes.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I yield myself 4 more minutes.
  We believe that immigrants, like women and African Americans before 
them, have rights in this country, and the time is ripe for a new civil 
rights moment. We believe that a nation of immigrants rejects its 
history and its heritage when millions of immigrants are confined 
forever to second-class status and that all Americans are debased by 
such a two-tier system. The time has come for comprehensive immigration 
reform.
  Our opponents believe that blunt enforcement can solve our current 
crisis. We believe that the culture and infrastructure of illegality 
can only be disrupted and our security and prosperity can only be 
assured through a three-pronged approach.
  First, we favor smarter and tougher enforcement through greater 
reliance on technology, better screening at our consulates abroad, more 
international cooperation on migration enforcement, working with Mexico 
and the other countries in Central America--which our opponents never 
think about or have asked to or have a program to try to do--and also 
tracking terrorist mobility and more efficient screening at U.S. work 
sites.
  Our national security and our immigration control efforts are both 
weakened when we fail to distinguish the millions of undocumented 
immigrants making vital contributions to our economy and the handful of 
extremists who would enter the United States to do us harm.
  How can we seriously consider diverting our scarce resources to 
building a fence along the border? This is a 19th century solution to a 
21st century problem. A fence--muro de muerte is the alternative, and 
we are saying that is the kind of wall we are going to build, with all 
the technology we have? It is a bankrupt policy.
  The focus on the border will not prevent undocumented immigration. 
Almost half of all undocumented immigrants enter through legal 
channels, and others will always find ways to go over, under, or around 
the wall. More importantly, a United States-Mexico border fence does 
nothing to help us identify and track terrorists who would almost 
certainly choose other strategies for entry, including the use of 
fraudulent or legitimate documents, or entry anywhere along an 
unguarded northern border or coastline.
  Second, in an economy which depends on immigrant labor, we favor the 
creation of legal opportunities so that all American workers have the 
right to labor with dignity and the protection of our laws. More 
opportunities must be created for workers and families to obtain green 
cards through our permanent visa system. And the 400,000 or so 
undocumented immigrants now joining our workforce each year must be 
offered access to temporary visas and to a spot in the formal economy 
when employers cannot find U.S. workers to take these jobs.

  Our temporary worker program differs in fundamental ways from the 
failed approaches of the past. We include robust wage guarantees to 
ensure that temporary workers will not depress the wages and working 
conditions of American workers, which is happening at the present time, 
and we back up these guarantees with strong complaint procedures and 
protections for whistleblowers. We believe guest workers must not be 
tied to a single employer but, rather, must have the right to vote with 
their feet by changing jobs when employers would exploit them. And we 
believe workers must have the right to adjust to permanent status if 
their situation changes and they choose to remain in the United States.
  Third, immigration reform will be fundamentally incomplete without a 
plan for bringing the undocumented immigrants already among us out of 
the shadows and into legal status. Our national security requires the 
United States to know who resides in our

[[Page S2488]]

country. Our economic prosperity requires that undocumented 
immigrants--5 percent of all workers in the United States--join the 
legal economy.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has used his additional 4 minutes. 
There is 13 minutes remaining.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I see my friend from Illinois here. I am 
going to take 1\1/2\ more minutes, and then I will yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, countless American families want their 
undocumented relatives to have the opportunity to become residents. One 
million immigrants rallied in communities across the country last week, 
and the crowds included thousands of families waving American flags and 
celebrating America as their adopted homeland.
  No one believes in amnesty for these immigrant workers and families, 
but we do believe in giving them a chance to earn--earn--legal status. 
That is the difference. Amnesty is a pardon. We are not pardoning any 
undocumented immigrants. What we are basically saying is: Come out of 
the shadows, pay a fine, pay your taxes, learn English, and after all 
those who are in line to come to the United States at the present time 
and have come to the United States, go to the back of the line and work 
your way to citizenship by playing by the rules. There are 70,000 
permanent resident aliens who are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. If 
you don't play by the rules, then you are subject to deportation. That 
is earning legal status, and that is the process we follow.
  All undocumented immigrants deserve this chance, but only those who 
pay the stiff fines, work for 6 years, pay their taxes, learn English 
and pass a civics test will be permitted to remain in the United 
States.
  Today, we embark on a historic debate. We have an opportunity to 
correct these historic wrongs. I look forward to the coming debate. 
Together, let us move forward, not backward, on genuine immigration 
reform.
  Mr. President, I have been here when Republicans and Democrats have 
come together to accept the challenge of an issue that is not going 
away. This issue is not going away. We now have Republicans and 
Democrats working together. The President has talked about this issue 
as well. Surely we ought to be challenged to find a way where this 
Nation can make progress with Republicans and Democrats and hopefully 
even the administration working together to help do something that is 
sensible, responsible, workable, humane, and consistent with our 
national traditions.
  I yield back whatever time is remaining.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois is recognized.

                          ____________________