[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 112 (Wednesday, July 31, 2013)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6100-S6102]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
FIXING AMERICA'S WELCOME MAT
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President they say history has a way of repeating
itself. That certainly came true in June when the Senate approved a
sweeping reform bill to revamp the nation's immigration laws.
Unfortunately, the U.S. Senate failed to learn from the mistakes
created by the 1986 overhaul.
In the 1980s, about 3 million people who were living in the country
illegally were granted legal status. Today, 27 years later, the U.S.
estimates 11 million undocumented immigrants are living here.
What should that tell us? It says that the 1986 law failed to stem
the flow of illegal immigration. It sent the wrong signal by granting
legal status to millions while ignoring the need to secure the border.
I do not need a crystal ball to tell me what would happen on the road
ahead if we repeat the mistakes of the past. I saw how legalizing
before securing our borders turned out. It turned America's time-
honored welcome mat into a timeworn doormat.
America's immigration system is broken. It is time to fix it so that
a legal flow of immigration can help the economy and bolster areas of
the workforce that are short of workers, from low-skilled to high-tech
workers.
But immigration laws should not come at the expense of American
workers or cause them to be disadvantaged, displaced or underpaid.
Rooting out fraud and abuse from many of our visa programs should be a
priority.
Unfortunately, the bill passed by the U.S. Senate would not fix what
is broken and is chock-full of loopholes that make the legalization
system far from ideal.
Thankfully our system of self-government protects representation of,
by and for the people with a bicameral Congress. Now the U.S. House of
Representatives has a chance to get it right.
The House is moving on a number of bills. They are having very
thoughtful
[[Page S6101]]
discussions on how to improve the legal system while adhering to the
rule of law. They also know that passing one sweeping bill is a recipe
for disaster--one that inevitably creates loopholes and allows special
interest provisions to override good policy.
I would like to discuss a few of their good ideas.
First, the House Judiciary Committee approved the SAFE ACT, a bill
that beefs up our interior enforcement efforts. It provides tools to
State and local law enforcement agencies to help the government enforce
immigration laws.
It enhances the 287(g) program, which I helped author. It gives the
States and localities the power to enact and enforce their own
immigration laws as long as they are consistent with Federal law. The
bill would improve our country's ability to remove criminal aliens.
Dangerous individuals would be detained, sex offenders would be made
inadmissible, and gang members would be both inadmissible and
deportable.
These are provisions that are omitted from the Senate bill. Dangerous
criminals are ignored in the Senate bill, and it was apparent that the
other side of the aisle did not want to have votes that would bar these
dangerous criminals from receiving legal status.
Securing the border is very important, but so is focusing on
individuals who violate our laws and violate the terms of their stay in
the U.S. If we are serious about being tough on sex offenders, domestic
abusers, drunk drivers, and other criminals, then the SAFE Act needs to
be passed by the Senate and sent to the President.
Second, the House Judiciary Committee approved a bill that improves
the existing E-VERIFY program. This program is a valuable tool and
should be made mandatory for all businesses. While the Senate bill does
make it mandatory, it does so over 6 years and provides exceptions for
certain employers. The House bill would implement the program on a
faster timetable, for which I have advocated.
Third, the House Judiciary Committee approved bills that improve the
legal system for people who want to live and work in the United States.
The committee approved a bill that focuses on high-skilled workers that
are needed in the country, and another bill that improves the legal
channels for people who want to work in agriculture. If we want to
ensure that we do not deal with millions of people here illegally in
the future, then we have to focus on getting our legal immigration
system in order.
Now, I would like to talk about the border bill that was approved by
the Committee on Homeland Security. This is a bill I am not ready to
endorse. Let me explain why.
The bill, known as the Border Security Results Act, is not a serious
and comprehensive approach to border security. While it takes a good
first step in requiring metrics to assess whether the borders are
secured, there is nothing that ensures that results are achieved.
The bill requires the Department of Homeland Security, within 6
months of enactment, to develop a strategy on how to secure our
borders. The strategy includes an assessment of threats along the
border. It will take into consideration the coordination of departments
and the cooperation of foreign countries. The strategy calls for an
assessment of technology needed. But, it does not actually do anything
to give agents the resources they need. It does nothing to require
fencing to be built.
After the strategy is submitted to Congress, the Secretary develops
an implementation plan and provides that to Congress and the Government
Accountability Office.
But like the Senate bill, there is no repercussions if the Secretary
does not actually submit a strategy. And, there is no verification or
approval of the strategy by Congress. Instead, it relies on this or a
future administration to make promises they will not keep. It relies on
them to fulfill the law, but we have seen time and again that they
thumb their nose at bills we send them. They not only refuse to
implement laws they like--such as ObamaCare-- but they will refuse to
carry this one out as well.
The bill requires the Secretary to develop metrics to measure the
``effectiveness'' of security at ports and between ports of entry. That
is a good start. But, there are no consequences if the Secretary does
not develop such metrics. The GAO would evaluate the metrics, but
again, there is no real consequence if they are flawed metrics. The
border still will not be secured.
The Secretary then certifies that her department has achieved
``operational control.'' The definition of ``operational control'' is
weakened from current law. The bill defines it as a ``condition in
which there is a not lower than 90 percent illegal border crossing
effectiveness rate, informed by situational awareness, and a
significant reduction in the movement of illicit drugs and other
contraband through such areas is being achieved.''
The GAO would attest if the certification for operational control is
truly done. What if the Secretary never certifies this? What if the GAO
says the Secretary's certification is not accurate? If the Department
fails to achieve control of the border, then they have to issue a
report to explain why. Again, it lacks any true accountability for this
or any future administration to secure the border.
Finally, I want to mention one part of the House border bill that is
most concerning to me. During committee mark-up, an amendment was
accepted that would require a plan on the exit tracking system, but
unfortunately there is no beef to it. Implementation of a biometric
exit system was a key point when the Senate considered immigration.
The Congress has passed several laws that require the executive
branch to track the entry and exit of foreign nationals. Those mandates
have been ignored. The airline industry has resisted. Instead of
building upon current law and finding a way to make it happen, the
House bill provides a way out if the exit system is not deemed feasible
by the Secretary--the same Secretary that has made no progress on the
system.
Border security is not only putting manpower and technology along the
southern border. It is also about tracking people that enter this
country. Given that 40 percent of our undocumented population consists
of visa overstays, we must address this problem immediately.
This problem is highlighted by a GAO report that was issued on
Tuesday. GAO found that the Department has lost track of more than 1
million people. We know they arrived in the United States, but we do
not have departure records.
By statute, the Department is required to report overstays. They
claim they do not report the estimates because of lack of confidence
that the data is reliable. After 17 years, the law has been ignored.
The government is not sophisticated enough to match incoming and
outgoing travel records, and that is a serious risk to our national
security.
Over the years, the GAO has highlighted the challenges that the
Department faces in putting the entry and exit system in place. Their
new report casts more doubt on the Department's competency.
When the Senate passed the immigration bill in June, I was very clear
in suggesting that the bill would have to be fixed by a conference
committee with the House, if it ever goes to a conference. With the
exception of the border security bill, the House has presented some
valuable ideas.
While I want an immigration reform bill sent to the President, I want
it done right. We can take our time to get it right.
Over the August recess, the American people will get their
opportunity to inform members of Congress how they feel about the
immigration proposals on the table.
But I can predict what many will say. I know from previous townhall
meetings in my State, the people do not want more laws that will go
ignored. They want the laws we have in place to be enforced.
We need legislation that upholds American values of hope, freedom and
opportunity. We need immigration laws in place that welcome law-abiding
immigrants to share their entrepreneurial spirit, build better lives
for themselves, and help make America a better place for generations to
come.
But we need legislation that upholds the rule of law and ensures that
we do not saddle future generations with the same problems we are faced
with today.
[[Page S6102]]
It is my hope that Congress, over the August break, will listen to
the American people and work to enact true reform that achieves real
results and makes good on the promises made in Washington.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island.
____________________