[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 171 (Thursday, November 19, 2015)]
[House]
[Pages H8381-H8400]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
AMERICAN SECURITY AGAINST FOREIGN ENEMIES ACT OF 2015
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 531, I call
up the bill (H.R. 4038) to require that supplemental certifications and
background investigations be completed prior to the admission of
certain aliens as refugees, and for other purposes, and ask for its
immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Woodall). Pursuant to House Resolution
531, the bill is considered read.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 4038
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``American Security Against
Foreign Enemies Act of 2015'' or as the ``American SAFE Act
of 2015''.
SEC. 2. REVIEW OF REFUGEES TO IDENTIFY SECURITY THREATS TO
THE UNITED STATES.
(a) Background Investigation.--In addition to the screening
conducted by the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Director
of the Federal Bureau of Investigation shall take all actions
necessary to ensure that each covered alien receives a
thorough background investigation prior to admission as a
refugee. A covered alien may not be admitted as a refugee
until the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation
certifies to the Secretary of Homeland Security and the
Director of National Intelligence that each covered alien has
received a background investigation that is sufficient to
determine whether the covered alien is a threat to the
security of the United States.
(b) Certification by Unanimous Concurrence.--A covered
alien may only be admitted to the United States after the
Secretary of Homeland Security, with the unanimous
concurrence of the Director of the Federal Bureau of
Investigation and the Director of National Intelligence,
certifies to the appropriate Congressional Committees that
the covered alien is not a threat to the security of the
United States.
(c) Inspector General Review of Certifications.--The
Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security
shall conduct a risk-based review of all certifications made
under subsection (b) each year and shall provide an annual
report detailing the findings to the appropriate
Congressional Committees.
(d) Monthly Report.--The Secretary of Homeland Security
shall submit to the appropriate Congressional Committees a
monthly report on the total number of applications for
admission with regard to which a certification under
subsection (b) was made and the number of covered aliens with
regard to whom such a certification was not made for the
month preceding the date of the report. The report shall
include, for each covered alien with regard to whom a
certification was not made, the concurrence or nonconcurrence
of each person whose concurrence was required by subsection
(b).
(e) Definitions.--In this Act:
(1) Covered alien.--The term ``covered alien'' means any
alien applying for admission to the United States as a
refugee who--
(A) is a national or resident of Iraq or Syria;
(B) has no nationality and whose last habitual residence
was in Iraq or Syria; or
(C) has been present in Iraq or Syria at any time on or
after March 1, 2011.
(2) Appropriate congressional committee.--The term
``appropriate Congressional Committees'' means--
(A) the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate;
(B) the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate;
(C) the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate;
(D) the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs of the Senate;
(E) the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate;
(F) the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate;
(G) the Committee on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives;
(H) the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the
House of Representatives;
(I) the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of
Representatives;
(J) the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of
Representatives;
(K) the Committee on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives; and
(L) the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of
Representatives.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill shall be debatable for 1 hour,
equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member
of the Committee on the Judiciary.
The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte) and the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Conyers) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
General Leave
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their
remarks and include extraneous materials on H.R. 4038, currently under
consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Virginia?
There was no objection.
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I support H.R. 4038, the American Security Against
Foreign Enemies Act of 2015.
Just one example of a terrorist taking advantage of the United
States' generous immigration policy in order to perpetrate attacks on
Americans is too many. Unfortunately, there are too many examples to
count. Most notable, of course, are the attacks on September 11, 2001,
perpetrated by 19 foreign nationals who were admitted to the U.S.
through our legal immigration system.
The U.S. Government has the ultimate responsibility to protect its
citizens. As such, if U.S. immigration policy allows foreign nationals
who want to do us harm access to U.S. soil, then the immigration policy
must be reviewed and amended.
We are faced with such a situation right now. There is a very real
possibility that a terrorist, particularly one from, or claiming to be
from, Syria or Iraq, will attempt to gain access to the United States
as a refugee. In fact, ISIS is making no secret of their plans to have
their members infiltrate groups of Syrian refugees. We should take ISIS
at its word.
Of course, our hope is that such an individual would be screened out
through the refugee vetting process. Unfortunately, we have heard time
and time again from top counterterrorism and intelligence officials
that the current vetting process cannot prevent such an individual from
receiving refugee status.
In fact, just late last month, FBI Director James Comey told the
Judiciary Committee that with a conflict zone like Syria, where there
is ``dramatically'' less information available to use during the
vetting process, he could not ``offer anybody an absolute assurance
that there is no risk associated with'' admitting Syrian nationals as
refugees.
He told another House committee that ``we can only query against that
which we have collected. And so if someone has never made a ripple in
the pond in Syria in a way that would get their identity or their
interest reflected in our database, we can query our database until the
cows come home but . . . nothing will show up because we have no record
on that person.''
The administration's foreign policy inaction in Syria, and failure to
take seriously the ISIS threat, are responsible for the flood of
Syrians currently leaving their country. Of course, we all remember
when the President told us that ISIS was the JV team. That JV team just
murdered 120 innocent people in Paris, including at least one American.
And the Paris JV team included at least one terrorist who was
registered as a refugee from Syria.
H.R. 4038 requires certification by the FBI Director that the
security vetting process is sufficient to prevent an individual who is
a security threat from being admitted as a refugee. The bill also
requires that the DHS Secretary, FBI Director, and Director of National
Intelligence certify to Congress that each refugee is not a security
threat prior to his or her admission to the United States.
In addition, H.R. 4038 requires the DHS Inspector General to review
such certifications annually and report its findings to Congress. The
certification procedures apply to aliens who are nationals of Iraq or
Syria, those who have no nationality and whose last habitual residence
was in Iraq or Syria, or who have been present in those countries at
any time on or after March 1, 2011.
[[Page H8382]]
H.R. 4038 puts the administration on notice that their lax attitude
toward this issue will no longer be tolerated. And it puts the
administration on notice that Congress is not yet finished reforming
refugee policy.
In fact, our committee has been hard at work long before the Paris
attacks working on legislation to make necessary security-related and
other changes to the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program. We look forward
to moving that legislation through the House.
H.R. 4038 is not meant to be the sole solution to the security
problems we face in vetting Syrian and other refugees, but it is an
important first step. I look forward to Congress taking additional
action to ensure America's safety.
I thank the gentleman from Texas and the gentleman from North
Carolina for the work they have done on this bill. I urge my colleagues
to support it.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker and Members, the so-called American SAFE Act purports to
make us safer. But as the administration has so correctly observed,
this measure would provide no meaningful additional security for the
American people. Worse yet, it would effectively deny refugee status
for Syrians and Iraqis who are themselves victims of terrorism in their
own homelands.
{time} 1145
H.R. 4038 is a terribly flawed and inhumane bill for many reasons. To
begin with, while ensuring the safety of all Americans should be our
top priority, H.R. 4038 does nothing to achieve this goal.
This measure sets unreasonable clearance standards that the
Department of Homeland Security simply cannot meet. Refugees seeking to
come to our shores are already subject to the highest level of vetting,
more than any other traveler or immigrant to the United States.
This extensive screening process is performed by the Department of
Homeland Security, the State Department, in conjunction with the
Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and
other law enforcement and intelligence agencies. The process utilizes
methodical and exhaustive background checks that often take up to 24
months, on average, to complete, and even longer, in some cases.
We must keep in mind that our Nation was founded by immigrants and
has historically welcomed refugees when there is suffering around the
globe. Whether it is an earthquake in Haiti, a tsunami in Asia, or 4
years of civil war in Syria, with no end in sight, the world looks
always to the United States. We provide protections for refugees and
asylum seekers, especially women and children.
Nevertheless, in the wake of the September 11 attacks on our shores
and the tragic November 13 terrorist attacks in Paris, we must be
vigilant, particularly in the midst of a global refugee crisis.
H.R. 4038, however, is an extreme over-reaction to these latest
security concerns. Rather than shutting our doors to these desperate
men and women and children who are risking their lives to escape death
and torture in their own homelands, we should work to utilize our
immense resources and good intentions of our citizens to welcome them.
Finally, Congress needs to do its part by properly funding refugee
resettlement as well as funding our Federal agencies so they have the
necessary personnel and programs to complete security checks that we
already have in place. Instead of slamming our doors to the world's
most vulnerable, we should be considering legislation to strengthen and
expand refugee programs.
Unfortunately, the bill before us today is not a serious effort to
legislate, and it will not make us safer. It is a knee-jerk reaction,
as evidenced by the fact that this measure was introduced just 2 days
ago, and has not been the subject of a single hearing or any meaningful
review by our committee.
Rather than betraying our values, we must continue to focus on the
most effective tools to keep us safe, while also providing refuge for
the world's most vulnerable.
Accordingly, I urge all of my colleagues to oppose H.R. 4038.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. McCaul), the chairman of the Homeland Security Committee,
and the chief sponsor of this bill.
Mr. McCAUL. Mr. Speaker, I want to first thank the gentleman from
Virginia, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, for his work on this
legislation.
I rise today to urge my colleagues to support the American Safe Act.
Let me be clear. We are a nation at war. The world was reminded last
week that Islamic terrorists are seeking to harm our people, destroy
our way of life, and undermine the foundational principles of the free
world.
Sadly, with the news that at least one of these terrorists may have
infiltrated Europe posing as a Syrian refugee, the Paris attacks appear
to confirm our worst fears, that, of the thousands of foreign fighters
who have gone to Syria and Iraq to join ISIS, some would be deployed to
bring terror back to the West.
The world is now looking at America for leadership and for a clear-
eyed understanding of the threat.
ISIS is not ``contained,'' as the President says. ISIS is expanding
globally and is plotting aggressively. The group is now responsible for
more than 60 terrorist plots against Western targets, including 18 in
the United States.
Here in the homeland, we have arrested more than one ISIS supporter a
week in the past year, and the FBI says it has nearly 1,000 ISIS-
related investigations in all 50 States.
Today, we must take decisive action to show the American people that
we are doing all that we can to protect our country. We must listen to
the words of our enemies.
ISIS has vowed, in their words, to exploit the refugee process, to
sneak operatives, to infiltrate the West, and they appear to have
already done that, to attack our allies.
For nearly a year, intelligence and law enforcement agencies have
warned Congress, both publicly and privately, that they are alarmed by
intelligence collection gaps and our ability to weed out terrorists
from the refugee process.
FBI Director Comey testified before my committee and stated: ``We can
query our databases until the cows come home, but nothing will show up
because we have no record of them.''
Homeland Security Secretary Johnson said: ``We know that
organizations like ISIS might like to exploit this program.''
This is an administration official's words, not mine.
This legislation would add two important layers to our defenses,
creating the most robust national security screening process in
American history for any refugee population.
The American SAFE Act also strikes an important balance between
security and our humanitarian responsibilities. It sets up roadblocks
to keep terrorists from entering the United States, while also allowing
legitimate refugees who are not a threat to be resettled appropriately.
Let us not forget, this legislation is the first in a series of steps
we must take to defend the homeland, but ultimately, to win this war,
we must take the fight to the enemy.
Last week, the streets of Paris could just have easily been the
streets of New York or Chicago or Houston or Los Angeles.
But as I have said before, our long-term message to these terrorists
must be clear. You may have fired the first shot in the struggle but,
rest assured, America will fire the last.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Lofgren), one who has worked harder on this issue than
anyone I know.
Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, all of us watched with horror the events in
Paris. November 13 was France's September 11.
And all of us have paused to consider what further should be done to
make sure that America is safe because our first obligation, as Members
of Congress, is to make sure that America is safe.
So, as we watch the refugees from the Middle East pouring into
Europe, concern has been expressed--and I think correctly--who are
these people
[[Page H8383]]
hidden among the many helpless victims? Are there those who would pose
a threat?
It is worth noting that our process for refugees is completely
different. No one gets into the United States unless they have been
completely vetted. This process starts with the U.N. referring only
those people who are vulnerable, who have been tortured, who have been
victimized, who are helpless women and children, for screening by us.
We have a process that includes soliciting information from the DEA,
from the intelligence agencies, from the FBI, and the like. All of
those agencies have a veto. If there is a problem, they veto the
admission. The process takes 2 years or more, and a very small number
of people actually are admitted.
Of the 2,000 or so Syrian refugees who have been admitted to the
United States, the overwhelming majority are children and widows who
have been victims of torture, who have seen their husbands beheaded.
The bill before us, as has been described by the Speaker and the
author, would stop the refugee program. They call it a pause. They
would stop it because it completely restructures the very elaborate
system that we have.
By putting the FBI as the lead agency, they would have to hire
agents, send them over. It would be a pause. That is what they have
described. We think it would take a couple of years to start up.
Now, why is that a bad idea?
ISIS is our enemy, and we need to fight them, and we need to defeat
them. But we are fighting on two levels; one, military, but also, this
is a fight of values.
America stands for freedom. We are the beacon of light, of democracy,
of freedom in the world. And part of that value of America is allowing
people who are escaping monsters like ISIS to be able to become
Americans like us.
We need to screen and make sure that we are completely safe. But if
we stop that program, we give ISIS a win.
Please defeat this bill.
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from
North Carolina (Mr. Hudson), the chief cosponsor of the legislation.
Mr. HUDSON. Mr. Speaker, America is a compassionate country. We are a
good country. We have a long history of accepting refugees, people
fleeing oppression and violence.
But we also have an obligation to the American people. As we welcome
people into this country who are seeking asylum, we owe it to the
American people to know who these people are. And when you have got a
terrorist group like ISIS, who has said that they will exploit this
refugee crisis to infiltrate America--this is an organization that has
said their goal is to come to America and kill Americans--I take them
at their word.
The number one responsibility of this body is to protect the American
people. It is not me saying that we have challenges with the current
vetting process; it is experts from President Obama's administration.
I draw your attention to the first quote here from Jeh Johnson: ``It
is true that we are not going to know a whole lot about the Syrians
that come forth in this process.'' That is definitely a challenge. That
is the Secretary of Homeland Security.
I draw your attention to the next quote from Director James Comey of
the FBI: ``We can only query against that which we have collected, and
so if someone has not made a ripple in the pond in Syria in a way that
would get their identity or their interest reflected in our databases,
we can query our data until the cows come home, but nothing will show
up because we have no record of that person.''
This is not me saying that. This is not Republicans saying that.
These are officials in President Obama's administration saying that the
current process is broken, that we are bringing in these refugees that
we cannot properly vet.
So our legislation simply says: Let's stop this flow unless and until
the law enforcement experts that President Obama has appointed, the FBI
Director, the Secretary of Homeland Security, can vouch for the fact
that we have a process in place that they are comfortable with.
How radical is that?
This is common sense, and that is why our polls show that as many as
75 percent of the American people support this measure.
{time} 1200
Mr. Speaker, I know the President has issued a veto threat, but I
hope that today in this House we can come together, Republicans and
Democrats, and respond to the will of the American people and do our
primary job to keep them safe so we can have a bipartisan vote that
doesn't say no refugees, it doesn't say stop Syrian refugees, and it
doesn't say don't ever let them in again. It says pause the program
unless and until the law enforcement experts are comfortable that we
have got a process.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to
support this legislation.
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield the remainder of my time to the
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Gowdy), the chairman of the
Immigration and Border Security Subcommittee, and ask unanimous consent
that he be able to control that time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Virginia?
There was no objection.
Mr. GOWDY. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Nadler), a distinguished member of the House Judiciary
Committee.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this irresponsible
bill that would effectively block the settlement of Syrian refugees in
the United States for years.
The shocking and tragic events in Paris have touched people all over
the world and strengthened our resolve to defeat the terrorists who are
responsible for these heinous acts, for bombing a Russian airliner, and
for carrying out deadly bombings in Beirut. But defeating terrorism
should not mean slamming the door in the faces of those who are fleeing
the terrorists. That is why I am appalled by the actions of this House
and by some of the words of my colleagues today.
Mr. Speaker, the United States has always been and should always be a
place of refuge. Remember, the Syrian refugees are running away from
ISIS. They are running away from war, from terror. The are its victims.
To stop thousands of desperate people who are fleeing unspeakable
violence is unconscionable. We might as well take down the Statute of
Liberty.
Countries with much smaller populations like Lebanon and Turkey have
agreed to take 1 million refugees or more. Even France just announced
they are increasing the number of Syrian refugees they are accepting.
We in the United States are talking about a mere 10,000. These refugees
are subject to an extensive vetting process which can take up to 24
months.
But the real danger America faces is that ISIS, through its
propaganda, can radicalize people already here and inspire them to
attack the United States from within. In Paris we saw that several of
the attackers were European nationals who could enter the United States
without being vetted, so it is ridiculous to assert that by denying
access to refugees, we would be making America safer.
We face a choice that will echo through history. In 1924, a racist,
xenophobic, and anti-Semitic Congress passed legislation slamming the
door shut on Jewish, Italian, Greek, and Eastern European immigrants.
The Almanac of American Politics said that, if it weren't for the 1924
Immigration Act, perhaps 2 million of the 6 million Jews who were
murdered in the Holocaust would have been living safely in the United
States instead.
Back then we shut our doors to people in desperate need. We must not
do so again. We must not let ourselves be guided by irrational fear. We
have a moral obligation and, for those who care, a religious obligation
to extend a hand to those in need.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill.
Mr. GOWDY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
California (Mr. McCarthy), the majority leader.
Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I
thank those who have worked on the bill, Congressman Richard Hudson,
Chairman Mike McCaul, a number of other committee chairmen, Chairman
Goodlatte, and others.
[[Page H8384]]
Mr. Speaker, this is not an issue that comes before us just because
of action that happened recently--a horrific action. Mr. Speaker, our
duty is to protect the American people. Without security, we cannot
have freedom. Without security, we cannot help others abroad.
The American people are generous, and we want to help those in the
world suffering from terrorism and civil war. The fact that America
gives far more in foreign aid than any other country in the world is a
testament to our generosity. In 2014, we gave over $6.5 billion in
humanitarian foreign aid alone. That doesn't even count the millions of
dollars that privately have been offered by American people.
But, Mr. Speaker, being generous does not mean we have to have a weak
screening process for refugees, especially for those coming from Iraq
and Syria where we know people are there who seek to do us harm and are
looking to exploit a weak process. It is wrong to condemn a strong
screening process using the language of charity and morality.
When we allow refugees into this country, we must be guided by one
single principle: If you are a terrorist or you are a threat to our
country, you are not getting in, period. The bill before us increases
the standards to keep those who want to do us harm out.
But America is not saying ``no'' to refugees. America always stands
as a beacon of hope for everyone fleeing oppression and terror. Nothing
will stop us from protecting the innocent while continuing our fight
against evil. Instead, this bill puts a pause on our refugee program
until we are certain that nobody being allowed in poses a threat to the
American people.
To those who do not even want to consider increasing accountability
in our refugee process--and to the President, who announced that he
wants to veto this bill--let me tell you this: It is against the values
of our Nation and the values of a free society to give terrorists the
opening they are looking for to come into our country and harm the
American people, and we have an obligation to stop that from happening.
In the debate we are having on the refugee crisis, we should not lose
sight of the root of the problem. The real problem is ISIL and our lack
of strategy to destroy them.
It astounds me that the President refuses to face reality and admit
that his strategy is failing. ISIL controls territory the size of
Maryland. Attacks in Paris, Beirut, and Egypt show that ISIL is not
contained to Iraq and Syria. Every day ISIL continues to exist is
another day they can train, recruit, and radicalize more people to
continue their war on the civilized world and threaten the safety of
the American people.
Mr. Speaker, this danger is real, and nothing can replace a winning
strategy. Here in the House, we will not accept half measures. We are
committed to keeping America safe. That is why I ask all in the House
to support this bill.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee), a distinguished member of the House Judiciary
Committee.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I have been on the Homeland Security
Committee since the heinous and vile acts of 9/11. I have often said
that I was at Ground Zero, and I had the misery of seeing the recovery
that was still occurring at that time. I take no backseat to the
concern and love for this Nation, as I know that neither do my
colleagues on both sides of the aisle.
But, Mr. Speaker, this legislation is divided in a simple premise: no
to refugees, stop the refugee program, turn your back on children,
women, and old people broken and bent. This side is saying that
America's values can parallel the love, respect, and commitment to the
national security of this Nation.
ISIL is determined to divide this bipolar world; divide it between
Muslims who share the distorted and profane interpretation and those
who live every day under the sun who love freedom. We do not define the
faith by those who kill us and maim us. As President Franklin Delano
Roosevelt said: ``The only thing we have to fear is fear itself''--
nameless, unreasoning, and unjustified terror which paralyzes needed
efforts to convert, retreat, and advance.
This is the extensive, extensive review that only a small number of
Syrians go through that are able to get in this country from refugee
camps. That is the only place they come from. This is the extensive
one.
I say to the President, certify it now.
But what this legislation does is requires that the 5-year-old Syrian
girl that has lived most of her life in a Jordanian camp must be
certified by four or five individuals who are already in the process of
the certification.
There are 60 million individuals who are displaced across the globe
now. Twenty percent of them are Syrians fleeing the conflict that has
taken 240,000 lives. Right now the FBI has 50 terrorist cells being
investigated. They cannot count them as Syrian refugees.
This is the wrong direction. Let us follow our values, Mr. Speaker.
Vote that bill down and bring refugees who are already certified. This
bill is unnecessary. It stops the refugee program. Where is our mercy?
Mr. GOWDY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Kentucky (Mr. Rogers), the chairman of the Appropriations Committee.
Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for
yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today first to reaffirm our solidarity with the
people of France, our brethren in Beirut, and the families of the
victims of Metrojet Flight 9268 who perished over the skies of the
Sinai. The senseless and unspeakable violence, the blind fanaticism,
the utter and irrational hatred for human life by ISIS, together they
present a threat not just to national and global security, but also to
the fundamental values that constitute the very fiber of civilization.
Mr. Speaker, ISIS must be stopped. The violence must end. And the
United States must do more--more to stamp out this evil, more to
eradicate the threats posed here and abroad, and more to ensure that
Americans can tuck in their children at night with a feeling of
security that they will be waking up tomorrow morning for school free
from fear. That is why we must support the SAFE Act. It is thoughtful,
and it will further one of our principal national security priorities--
keeping Americans safe--as we work to eliminate the threat posed by
ISIS.
The instability in Syria and the surrounding region has continued
unabated for more than 4 years, and we have witnessed an indescribable
humanitarian crisis because of the brutality of the Assad regime and
radical Islamic groups such as ISIS.
In the wake of the Paris tragedy, we must step back and review the
procedures in place for admitting refugees resulting from this conflict
coming into our country. We can and must implement a system that
assists the victims of the tragedy but that also prioritizes American
security first.
H.R. 4038 will ensure that no refugee from Iraq or Syria steps foot
on U.S. soil without the Secretary of the Department of Homeland
Security, the FBI Director, and the highest intelligence officer
certifying that each refugee is not a security threat to the U.S. The
Department of Homeland Security, the FBI, and the Director of National
Intelligence must unanimously certify that a person seeking refuge in
this country does not represent a security threat. This is an
unprecedented vetting process to ensure dangerous people do not slip
through the cracks.
I urge your support, all in this Chamber, so we can provide our
military and intelligence personnel with the best possible chance for
success as they work to keep us safe.
Mr. Speaker, I urge support for the bill.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from
Mississippi (Mr. Thompson), ranking member on the Homeland Security
Committee.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the generosity
from my colleague from Michigan on the time.
Mr. Speaker, we live in uncertain and dangerous times with ever-
evolving terrorist threats. The brutality that ISIL has inflicted on
innocent people is both chilling and demands action.
As Members of Congress, we have a responsibility to do all we can to
protect our citizens. In the wake of the
[[Page H8385]]
Paris attacks, questions have been raised about the screening system
that the U.S. utilizes and whether it can be exploited by terrorists.
{time} 1215
In light of those questions, Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a
letter from the Department of Homeland Security former Secretary Janet
Napolitano and former Secretary Michael Chertoff supporting the current
system of vetting refugees.
November 19, 2015.
Hon. Barack Obama,
President of the United States,
The White House, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. President: Following the creation of the
Department of Homeland Security, substantial progress has
been made in protecting our nation's homeland. The ongoing
efforts by our national security experts have provided tools
and resources to make a coordinated attack like the one in
Paris last week much more difficult to achieve here at home.
As a nation, we have strengthened security at our air, land,
and sea ports; we have strengthened the ability to monitor
the travel of bad actors and detect fraud in our visa
process; we have strengthened partnerships with state and
local law enforcement across the nation to ensure that they
are prepared; and we have engaged with minority and ethnic
communities to prevent homegrown radicalization.
As former Secretaries of the U.S. Department of Homeland
Security, it is our view that the American people are safer
due to these efforts, but the Paris attacks remind us that we
must remain ever-vigilant in this effort and that the highest
priority of our government is to keep American's safe. It is
our view that we can achieve this mission in a manner that is
consistent with American values of openness and
inclusiveness. With respect to refugees seeking to resettle
here, it is our view that we can admit the most vulnerable of
these refugees into this country safely as long as we do not
compromise the already established protections. The process
for any refugee seeking entry to the United States requires
the highest level of scrutiny from a law enforcement and
national security perspective. The process takes place while
the refugees are still overseas, and it is lengthy and
deliberate--taking an average of 18-24 months with no waiver
of any steps. First, we consider only the most vulnerable--
particularly survivors of violence and torture, those with
severe medical conditions, and women and children--for
potential admittance to the U.S. Once a candidate is selected
they are subjected to biographic and biometric security
reviews based on the latest intelligence from the Department
of Homeland Security (DHS), the National Counterterrorism
Center, the FBI's Terrorist Screening Center, the Department
of State, and the Department of Defense. If they pass these
national security checks, they will then be personally
interviewed by specially trained DHS personnel to ensure they
are qualified for admittance. They are then subjected to
recurrent vetting up to the final point of departure and a
final interview at the border before being admitted into the
U.S.
The process that is currently in place is thorough and
robust and, so long as it is fully implemented and not
diluted, it will allow us to safely admit the most vulnerable
refugees while protecting the American people. Fortunately,
these goals are not mutually exclusive.
Sincerely,
Janet Napolitano,
Former Secretary (2009-2013), Department of Homeland
Security.
Michael Chertoff,
Former Secretary (2005-2009), Department of Homeland
Security.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, in recent days, however, we
have seen a number of Governors, including the Governor of my home
State, choose fear over facts. If they had done their research, they
would have learned that our program is an extensive 13-step process.
It starts with a referral from the United Nations of a prescreened
person within its refugee camps, requires the Department of Homeland
Security to do in-person interviews, and subjects each applicant to
recurring vetting against the Department of Homeland Security, the
State Department, FBI, Department of Defense, and intelligence
community terrorist and criminal databases. No excuses, Mr. Speaker. If
any one of those reviews pops up with a problem, that person can't be
considered for the refugee program--no excuses.
Unlike in Europe, where migrants crossed into countries that had
little opportunity to vet them, no alien is allowed onto U.S. soil
until all the checks are completed to DHS' satisfaction. As has already
been said by my colleague, Zoe Lofgren, it takes about 18 to 24 months
to process an applicant for refugee status.
Now, that processing is thorough, Mr. Speaker, and it is complete.
But there has been a reference to a stolen passport in the Paris
situation. That person, if they had applied for the refugee program,
would have had to go through the same process of vetting that would
have required at least 18 to 24 months. So the thought that that person
could just get on a plane and get here to this country is actually not
accurate, and that is my effort to perfect the record.
Our system of vetting is a multi-layered, multi-agency approach where
the FBI has veto authority on any applicant seeking refugee status.
While no system is risk free, the protections in place in the American
system are rigorous, robust, and extensive.
In fact, Mr. Speaker, yesterday a witness that the majority invited
to appear before our committee, Matthew Olsen, the former Director of
the National Counterterrorism Center, told our committee that no
refugee program in the world is as extensive as what we do in the
United States.
Yet, here we are today considering H.R. 4038, a bill that would upend
the current system, which was developed by security personnel with one
thought in mind: to protect the homeland. And these security personnel
have done a wonderful job.
To the knowledge of all of us, none of the refugees that we are
talking about from Syria or Iraq who came through this system have done
anything but been model citizens since they have been here. Just for
the record, there were 23,000 people that applied for refugee status
from these two countries. Of those 23,000, about 7,000 were actually
interviewed. Of those 7,000, only 2,000 were admitted.
So, Mr. Speaker, our system is robust. It works and it speaks to our
values as Americans. I am proud to say that people who are abused,
people who are oppressed, can still look to this country, follow the
rules. If those rules are properly applied, they can look to America as
somewhere they can call home, because most of those individuals
applying for refugee status can't go home.
Once again, I call on Members to embrace facts over fear, Mr.
Speaker, and vote against H.R. 4038.
Mr. GOWDY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas
(Mr. Poe).
Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from South
Carolina for the time.
Mr. Speaker, ISIS is at war with the United States. The question is:
Is America at war with ISIS? I am not so sure, since we don't have a
strategy to defeat ISIS, other than if we are attacked, shelter in
place, hunker down, get more security guards around the Capitol, use
the tunnels rather than walk outside. That is what we were told after
the Paris attacks, Mr. Speaker.
This legislation is really simple. It has at its core the idea to
protect American citizens. It has nothing to do with refugees as far as
whether we accept refugees. Our country accepts refugees. We always
have. That is clear. It is not the issue of refugees. It is the issue
of letting ISIS terrorists get into the country to kill us, Mr.
Speaker.
Our own security that the gentleman from Mississippi kept talking
about tells us we cannot vet Syrian refugees. The FBI Director says
that. We can't do it. We are not capable of doing it. One of the
reasons is many of these folks have no identity. So we can't do a
background check on somebody who has no identity.
This legislation says let's take some safeguards. Before we bring in
these specific refugees, let's make sure that the people in charge of
security certify that this person is not a threat. They can't do it
right now. Even the FBI Director says they can't certify. We owe that
to the American public. This legislation does that.
The gentleman from Mississippi is correct that 31 Governors of the
States say: Wait a minute. Not so fast. Find out who these people are.
I think the Governors of the States get it right. They ought to have
the ability, I think, to decide whether people should come to their
State or not only after a security check.
So this legislation is a step to protect America, one of the things
we are supposed to do. The legislation is coming up quickly. Why?
Because it is an
[[Page H8386]]
immediate threat. We have got refugees being bombed over in Syria. If
we are going to take them in, let's at least have a plan to protect not
only us, but those refugees.
That plan is in this legislation. It seems to me it would be
irresponsible not to pass the legislation to require a certification of
everybody that comes into America so that America could be safe because
that is our responsibility, Mr. Speaker.
And that is just the way it is.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott).
(Mr. McDERMOTT asked and was given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, this bill is nothing but a PR piece that
could have been written by Joseph Goebbels, who said, If you can make
people afraid, you can make them do anything. What you are seeing here
is the Republican's attempt to panic the American people that there is
not a system in place.
Let me tell you about this system that is there. Mr. Thompson from
Mississippi said what is really there. I helped a woman who for 2 years
was a translator for American troops in Iraq. She was so good she saved
lots of people's lives. She was so good that the enemy put a mark on
her and said they were going to kill her. So she had to go into hiding.
It took her from January 2007 until September 2007 to get the papers
and the witnesses and all the information necessary to get her into the
United States. Somebody who had put her life on the line for us, our
soldiers, it took 9 months to get her in. Then her mother and her
brothers and sisters, who were 16 and 12 and 9, it took them 2 years to
get into this country.
We have a robust system that is working. This bill is PR bologna. We
ought to vote ``no.'' It sends the wrong message. It says only White
Christians can come into this country.
Mr. GOWDY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas
(Mr. Hensarling), the chairman of the Financial Services Committee.
Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding and
for all of his work to make our Nation more secure.
Mr. Speaker, I do rise in support today of the safety and security of
the American people. As Members of Congress, we have no more sacred
responsibility. Thus, I rise in support of the American SAFE Act.
Now, I join all Americans and all the people of the world in standing
with the people of Paris. We are so sobered as to what happened to
their homeland, but we are also sobered by the challenge and the grave
responsibility to thwart the same evil from coming to our homeland.
The Director of the FBI testified before Congress just last month
that a number of people who were of serious concern were able to slip
through screenings of Iraqi refugees. That is what the Director of the
FBI said. This disturbing information, Mr. Speaker, obviously raises
very serious red flags about lapses in the security within our current
refugee vetting system.
Again, it is why I support and I encourage all Members to support the
American SAFE Act of 2015. It would effectively hit the pause button on
the refugee program, not the stop, but the pause button.
It is simple legislation. It simply requires more rigid standards so
that the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Director of
National Intelligence would positively certify that each refugee from
Iraq and Syria does not pose a security threat to us, to our homeland,
to our families. Otherwise, they will not be permitted to set down on
American soil. It is simple. It is common sense. It is needed.
Mr. Speaker, our hearts also go out to the millions of refugees
forced to flee their homes and save their lives. There is no other
country in the world--no other country in the world--that has been more
generous with their time and treasure to refugees than the United
States of America.
But today is not the day to share our territory, not until and unless
these people can be properly vetted to ensure they don't threaten our
families.
Mr. Speaker, hopefully, the world has awakened that there is a very
real threat that ISIS poses. It is not the JV team. They are not
contained. What happened in Paris was not merely a setback.
I urge my colleagues to take the responsibility to secure our
homeland seriously. This will be the first of what I know will be many
steps that this Chamber will take to address the growing threats that
are posed to our families and our country.
I thank the sponsor of the legislation for bringing it to the floor.
I urge all my colleagues to adopt it.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Pelosi), our leader.
{time} 1230
Ms. PELOSI. I thank the gentleman for yielding and for his great
service to our country in promoting our values and strengthening our
Nation.
Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor in a very prayerful way today
because we were all horrified at what happened in Paris, at what
happened in Beirut, at what happened to the Russian airliner, to name a
few recent incidences.
We recognize that that is horrible and that we have to protect the
American people from it. To do so, we must be strong, but our strength
must also spring from our prayerfulness for those who lost their lives
or for those whose security was threatened physically, emotionally, and
in every other way.
In our country, we have a relationship with France. They were our
earliest friends. That is why in this Chamber of the House of
Representatives, any visitor can see there are only two paintings. One
is of our great patriarch, George Washington, our hero, our Founding
Father.
The other painting in this Chamber is of the Marquis de Lafayette. It
is in recognition of the friendship that the French Government extended
to the Colonies in our war for independence.
Just imagine George Washington and Lafayette, a long, long
friendship. So, while we are concerned about violence wherever it
exists in the world, when Paris was hit in such a vicious way, in some
ways, it hit home for us, not that the other lives were not equally as
important.
As we come to the floor to talk about what we do next, we take an
oath of office--every one of us--to protect and to support the American
people and the Constitution of the United States. Keeping the American
people safe is our first responsibility. It is the oath we take. If the
American people aren't safe, what else really matters?
We understand the concern, the fear, in the country when an act of
terrorism strikes. In fact, that is the goal of terrorists: to instill
fear, to instill terror. We cannot let them succeed; so, we have to
take the measures necessary to protect the American people and to be
very strong in how we do it.
That is why I have a problem with the bill that is on the floor
today. It is because I think we have a much stronger, better option to
protect the American people, and that is in the form of the Thompson-
Lofgren legislation.
Unlike in the Republican bill, the Democratic alternative applies
tough scrutiny to all potential refugees, not just to Syrians and
Iraqis, as the Republican bill is limited to.
The Thompson-Lofgren Secure Refugee Process Act would require the
Secretary of Homeland Security to verify the identities of all refugee
applicants. Any application that contains insufficient, conflicting, or
unreliable information would be denied from day one.
The bill also requires that at least five Federal agencies--the
Department of Homeland Security, the Attorney General, the Federal
Bureau of Investigation, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of
Defense, the Director of National Intelligence--check all refugee
applications against their records. Any application that indicates a
national security or a criminal threat would be denied--all. Not Iraq-
Syria--all.
Two former Secretaries of Homeland Security--Secretary Janet
Napolitano and Secretary Michael Chertoff--have written about the
process that is in existence now and which the Thompson-Lofgren
legislation respects. The process that is currently in place is
thorough and robust, and so long as it is fully implemented and not
diluted, it will allow us to safely admit the most vulnerable refugees
while protecting the American people. Fortunately,
[[Page H8387]]
they say, these goals are not mutually exclusive.
There are other things that we could be doing in a bipartisan way,
and I would have hoped that that would have been a place we could have
gone with this. One of them relates to closing loopholes in the Visa
Waiver Program.
Today our colleagues on the Senate side are putting forth their
principles, which state: ``If an ISIS recruit attempts to travel to the
United States on a fraudulent paper passport issued by a country that
participates in the Visa Waiver Program, that individual would avoid
biometric screening and an in-person interview.''
How could we allow this loophole to exist if we are truly addressing
this challenge in a comprehensive way?
If the Republicans want to make the Nation safer in the face of
terror, there is another clear area in which we should act, and that is
we should be voting on Republican Congressman Peter King's bill in
order to close the appalling loophole.
It is outrageous that a person who is on the terrorism watch list--
listen to this. If someone is on the terrorist watch list, he could
walk into a gun store and buy a gun. His bill is called the Denying
Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act.
The visa waiver.
Close the terrorist gun loophole.
According to the GAO, over the last 11 years, more than 2,000
suspects on the FBI's terrorist watch list bought weapons in the United
States. Did you know that?
Ninety-one percent of all suspected terrorists who tried to buy guns
in the United States walked away with the weapons they wanted over the
time period with just 190 rejected despite their having ominous
histories. Listen, 5 to 1, 10 to 1, they were able to get these guns.
Why can't we talk about guns when we talk about danger to the
American people?
It is outrageous that we would be slamming the door to mothers and
children while we still allow people on the terrorist watch list to
walk in the door of a gun store and buy a gun.
With regard to those mothers and children, I join with labor, civil,
human rights, and faith groups from the U.S. Conference of Catholic
Bishops, from the Episcopalians, the Lutherans, the Methodists, the
Presbyterians, the evangelicals, and Jewish groups. I join them in
saying that the Republican bill before the House today fails to meet
our values and fails to strengthen the security of the American people.
Families in Syria and Iraq are desperately trying to escape ISIS'
gruesome campaign of torture, rape, violence, and terror of the Assad
regime. The Republican bill before the House today severely handicaps
the refugee settlement in the future in our country. It slams that door
again on desperate mothers and children who are fleeing ISIS'
unspeakable violence.
As Leith Anderson, President of the National Association of
Evangelicals, said: ``Of course we want to keep terrorists out of our
country, but let's not punish the victims of ISIS for the sins of
ISIS.''
Did you know this? Here are the facts.
Since 2001--just in the last few years--only about 2,200 Syrians have
been admitted to the United States. Half are children, and 25 percent
are seniors. All faced an 18- to 24-month-long screening process.
As the Refugee Council and its coalition of more than 80 faith,
humanitarian, and human rights groups point out in their letter to
Congress: ``Because so few refugees in the world are resettled, the
United States often chooses the most vulnerable, including refugees who
cannot remain safely where they are and families with children who
cannot receive the medical care they need to survive.''
Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record the Refugee Council's letter
with all of the cosigners.
Refugee Council USA,
Washington, DC, November 18, 2015.
Dear Representative: On behalf of Refugee Council USA
(RCUSA), a coalition of 20 non-governmental organizations
committed to refugee protection and welcome, I write to you
today to urge you to protect Syrian and Iraqi refugees and
the integrity of the United States refugee resettlement
program by voting NO on H.R. 4038--The American Security
Against Foreign Enemies Act 2015.
Since 1975, the United States has resettled more than 3
million refugees from around the world, including 169,000
from Bosnia and more than 100,000 from Iraq. Three quarters
of a million of those refugees entered the U.S. since 2001.
During that time, there have been no recorded terrorist acts
in the United States by a refugee. That should come as little
surprise. Refugees are, by definition, people fleeing from
persecution--not persecutors themselves.
H.R. 4038 creates a bureaucratic review process that could
take years to implement and would effectively shut down
refugee resettlement. The bill requires the Secretary of
Homeland Security to ``certify'' whether an individual
refugee is a threat or not after ``concurrence'' with the
Directors of the FBI and DNI. The bill does not provide
guidance on what the process for certification will be. This
process will have to be created and agreed upon by three
heads of agencies. Establishing such a process could take
years, and in the meantime, refugees who could be resettled
would languish in camps and dangerous situations, Syrian
Americans would not be able to reunite with their family
members, and there would be very real ramifications for
international refugee protection and U.S. foreign policy
interests in the region.
The process, once established, would add months or years to
the security screening process, which is already the
lengthiest and most robust in the world, routinely taking
between 18 and 36 months. Obtaining the concurrence of three
heads of federal agencies for EACH REFUGEE would take years
and effectively put an end to the refugee resettlement
program. For reasons of security and safety, security and
medical clearances are only valid for limited periods of
time. During the certification process, these clearances will
expire. This will mean that refugees will be caught in an un-
ending loop of security clearances that will never end.
The bill requires reporting to thirteen congressional
committees on each refugee that is considered for
resettlement. This is unreasonably burdensome and will
further delay the admission of refugees, cause security
clearances to expire, and effectively end the program.
Refugees are already the most vetted non-citizens in our
country. All refugees undergo thorough and rigorous security
screenings prior to arriving in the United States, including
but not limited to multiple biographic and identity
investigations; FBI biometric checks of applicants'
fingerprints and photographs; in-depth, in-person interviews
by well-trained Department of Homeland Security officers;
medical screenings; investigations by the National
Counterterrorism Center; and other checks by U.S. domestic
and international intelligence agencies. Supervisory review
of all decisions; random case assignment; inter-agency
national security teams; trained document experts; forensic
testing of documents; and interpreter monitoring are in place
to maintain the security of the refugee resettlement program.
Due to technological advances, Syrian refugees are also
undergoing iris scans to confirm their identity through the
process.
The bill is a waste of resources. Funds used to establish
and run this certification process would be better used in
conducting actual security reviews of refugees and others who
are vetted by these agencies.
The bill is a pretext and requires differential treatment
of refugees from Syria and Iraq without providing a
justification for the additional verification. It is a
disguised attempt to stop refugees from two countries long
beset by internal conflict, including refugees who have been
in neither Syria nor Iraq for four years. Differential
treatment, with no clear justification, amounts to
discrimination on the basis of nationality without rational
basis.
No terrorist attacks in the US have been committed by
refugees. The few non-citizens who have caused harm have come
to the US as tourists or through other means. This bill will
tell the world that the US has no interest in being part of
the global solution to protect the victims of the violence in
Syria and Iraq. It will keep US citizen family members of
these refugees from reuniting with their loved ones who are
in danger. This bill does nothing to keep the country safe,
is a waste of tax dollars, and is an attack on refugees and
immigrants--both those who are seeking safety and those who
are already here.
For these reasons we ask that you vote ``no'' on H.R. 4038.
We also want to draw your attention to the attached letter
signed yesterday by 81 national organizations in support of
Syrian refugees.
We appreciate your support in protecting the refugees.
Sincerely,
Melanie Nezer,
Chair, Refugee Council USA.
Ms. PELOSI. As it is the proud American tradition, we can both ensure
the security of our country and welcome desperate women, children, and
seniors who are facing ISIS' brutality. As my colleague who spoke
before me just said, our hearts go out to the refugees, but our hand of
friendship does not. And it could.
We could do this in a bipartisan way. If we betray our values as a
country and slam the door in the faces of those innocent victims of
terror, we do not strengthen our security. We weaken ourselves in the
fight against ISIS' savage ideology.
[[Page H8388]]
As the Refugee Council USA and its coalition wrote to Congress--and
this is very important--``it would send a demoralizing and dangerous
message to the world that the United States makes judgments about
people based on the country they come from and their religion. This
feeds into extremist propaganda and makes us all less safe.''
I talked about the French to begin with. It was interesting to me to
hear President Hollande as he spoke to thousands of people in the wake
of the tragedy. What he said in some of his remarks at various venues
was that France would be welcoming 30,000 refugees from Syria in the
period ahead. With all that they have suffered, with the immediacy of
the tragedy, with the emotion of the moment, they are still doing the
right thing.
The Republican bill before us does not make us safer, and it does not
reflect our values. It does not have my support.
Mr. GOWDY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Nebraska (Mr. Ashford).
Mr. ASHFORD. Mr. Speaker, in my view, H.R. 4038 is, in fact, a
commonsense approach to addressing the legitimate security concerns
that my constituents and the American people have expressed to me and
are expressing today.
In the wake of the horrific attacks in Paris--in my view, it is a
game-changer--we must and are obligated to reassess our existing
procedures--and that is all this bill does--for admitting and
monitoring refugees from countries associated with ISIS. I cannot sit
back and ignore the concerns of my constituents and the American
public.
This legislation does not shut down the refugee asylum process. If it
did, I wouldn't support it. We are simply asking the administration to
reassure us that those coming to the United States do not pose a threat
to the American people. We should not accept anything less from our
Federal Government.
I am very proud of our American legacy of being a welcoming nation,
and I have devoted much of my professional life to that concept and
idea. This legislation, in my view, does not diminish that legacy.
Rather, this legislation will protect that legacy into the future and
will reassure Americans that we are working to protect them.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Meeks).
Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I think it is without question that we have
the strongest, the most stringent, and the toughest refugee system in
the entire world. I don't think anybody can dispute that. Yet, we are
still humanitarians with regard to what our system is.
This bill is called the American SAFE Act, but where our greatest
danger lies is when rhetoric is given for ISIS to utilize in order to
recruit American citizens--those of us who are here to radicalize
them--and then they can go to a gun shop and buy an assault weapon.
{time} 1245
If we truly want to make sure that America is safe, we should make
sure that no homegrown or radicalized person here has access to an
assault weapon. We should have a bill.
We want every American to be safe, as I hear my colleagues talking. I
am with you. How do we make them safe? Make sure that nobody, refugee
or otherwise, has the ability to come to our Nation and put their hands
on an assault weapon that can harm our people. That is what will keep
America safe. Working together with the most stringent refugee system
is what we need to do.
This is just something to try to keep people from coming in who are
running away from rape, from violence, from persecution. Young children
and women who are widows overwhelmingly are the individuals of the
2,000 that have been led in here.
Let's keep America safe. Let's keep assault weapons out of our land.
Mr. GOWDY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Rohrabacher).
Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4038. This
legislation will give us a pause to ensure that a benevolent safe haven
in America is not used by terrorists to murder a large number of
Americans. After the slaughter in Paris, it behooves us to take a close
look to see to it that Americans will not be put in jeopardy by an
irresponsible refugee policy or by flaws in our own system that already
exist.
We can be proud that our country has a tradition of assisting
suffering refugees, but we will not be consistent with that by putting
Americans in jeopardy.
What could we do that might make the system better, improve the
system, protect more Americans? If we pause for a moment, we might come
up with some ideas. For example, let me be the first on the floor of
the House to advocate that all people coming here, especially from the
Middle East, be given polygraph tests. Let's give them a lie detector
test to find out who they are. This shouldn't be an option for our
embassies. It should be a requirement for our embassies to give such
polygraph tests.
Finally, we have heard several references to the Jews being sent back
in 1938 to Nazi Germany. Well, the Jews had been targeted for genocide.
It was wrong, it was horrible, and it was immoral for us to send them
back and not recognize they had been targeted for genocide.
Well, today the Christians in the Middle East are targeted for
genocide. I hear over here: Oh, no, you are not going to let anybody in
but Christians. No. Christians should get the priority the same way
those Jews should have been given the priority in 1938 because, today,
Christians are targeted for genocide in the Middle East. So we do not
want to make the same mistake that sent the Jews back in 1938 to
Hitler's death camps. Let's not make the same mistake and send
Christians back because we won't give them priority because it might
make some people upset with us.
I call for, number one, my colleagues to join us and save the
Christians from genocide; and number two, let's make our system better
so Americans are not put in jeopardy by the benevolence of our own
people.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Sherman).
Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, we want to vote for a bill to reflect the
angst of our constituents. If you read this bill, you can't vote for
it. It forces our three security leaders--the Director of the FBI, the
Director of National Intelligence, and the Secretary of Homeland
Security--to personally review, vote on, and certify each and every
individual refugee file.
We admitted 187 Syrian refugees last month. If our security leaders
just spend 2 hours on each file, it will consume all of their working
hours. ISIS cannot simultaneously and permanently incapacitate our
security leaders. This bill does.
Now, some will say that our security leaders just won't look at any
of the files, that this is an underhanded way for Congress to halt all
refugees without taking responsibility, but our security leaders are
human. They are going to look at the picture of Aylan Kurdi--that 3-
year-old boy on the Turkish beach--and our security leaders will know
that if they just invest a couple of hours in personally reviewing a
file, they can save a human life. If they just spend another 2 hours,
they can save another human life. Our security leaders will be full-
time refugee evaluators.
This bill is not a pause bill. This is a permanent bill which
permanently incapacitates our security agencies. Read the bill. Vote
``no.''
Mr. GOWDY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Mississippi (Mr. Palazzo).
Mr. PALAZZO. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my friend from South
Carolina for the time.
Mr. Speaker, we are under attack. Across the globe and here at home,
we are being targeted. We are at war. The enemy has brought war to us.
And make no mistake about it, this enemy is radical Muslim extremism.
Last week in Paris, we saw a brutal reminder of just how dedicated
our enemy is in fighting this war against us. We must fight back, and
we must do more. The United States of America must do more.
The President of the United States, on the very day ISIS attacked
Paris, argued that ISIS had been contained. He was wrong. Last year,
the President called ISIS the JV team. He was wrong. The President has
been wrong on ISIS
[[Page H8389]]
from the very beginning, and he is wrong now. Where is the strategy?
Where is the willpower? Where is the leadership?
Two years ago, Secretary of State John Kerry testified in front of
the House Armed Services Committee about the need to arm Syrian rebels.
I questioned this decision because we had no way of vetting these
rebels. I told Secretary Kerry at the time: ``America is just not
buying what you are selling.'' Two years later, the administration has
shut down the arming of Syrian rebels because it was completely
ineffective.
Now, the administration wants to bring in 10,000 Syrian refugees to
the United States, refugees who even the Director of the FBI says
cannot be fully vetted. We cannot allow this to happen
Mr. Speaker, today we are going to pass a strong piece of legislation
to protect the American people. The SAFE Act will ensure the highest
level of scrutiny is placed on every single Syrian refugee and
effectively stop this program until we can ensure Americans are
protected. I believe we should do more, but this is a powerful first
step to stopping dangerous terrorists from reaching our soil.
The President, our Commander in Chief, the one person charged with
protecting the U.S. homeland above all others has threatened to veto
this bill. I dare him. I dare the President to veto this bill because
he is angrier at Republicans than he is terrorists. I dare him to veto
this bill because he thinks his strategy is working, despite the
devastation in Paris. I dare the President of the United States to tell
the citizens of the United States that he is more concerned with Syrian
refugees than the safety of the American people. I dare him.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Ted Lieu).
Mr. TED LIEU of California. Mr. Speaker, I am Congressman Ted Lieu. I
am a veteran, and I oppose the Republican legislation that would upend
America's refugee program for Syrians and Iraqis. It is the wrong
solution for the wrong problem.
There has not been a single act of terrorism on American soil
committed by a refugee. In Paris, those horrific attacks were committed
by French and Belgian citizens. Under the Republican rationale, we
ought to be banning travel for French and Belgians to America. If that
sounds ridiculous, then so is scapegoating Syrian orphans, widows, and
senior citizens fleeing persecution.
America is a country born of persecution, forged in liberty's name
with equality for all. We are that shining city upon the hill. We are
better than this.
Mr. GOWDY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from the
great State of South Carolina (Mr. Duncan).
Mr. DUNCAN of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, as a Christian, I have
compassion and sympathy for the refugees in Syria. In fact, I visited
with many of them in a refugee camp in Jordan, a camp that held about
120,000 Syrian refugees.
We are criticized for not having compassion on this issue. Let me
tell you, compassion cuts two ways. We should also be cognizant of the
compassion we should show our fellow citizens here in America. That
compassion is exemplified by using the good sense that God gave us in
addressing this national security concern that our Nation faces.
Our compassion should be, too, to make sure to the best of our
abilities--and I think that is what this legislation does--is it says
we are going to use the best of our abilities that no harm comes to our
fellow countrymen. We should do everything we can to make sure that
elements of evil are not introduced, due to our compassionate hearts,
into the neighborhoods, the towns, the cities, and the States that we
represent in this great Nation.
We lock our doors, not because we hate the people on the outside. We
lock our doors because we love the people on the inside. This
legislation is a great first step to hit pause. Let's get this right
for the people we serve in the great Nation that we swear to uphold and
defend.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, my Republican friends, unlike the French
who had the vision and courage not to scapegoat desperate Syrian
refugees fleeing the barbarians that attacked them in Paris, this is a
foolish attempt to thwart ISIS terrorists who won't wait 2 years to be
vetted.
They would do what the 9/11 hijackers did using the existing visa
system. Are we going to pause and certify visas for students, tourists,
or workers? Why not?
One really objectionable portion of this bill for me is I have worked
for 10 years to try and help the Iraqis who worked with us in Iraq
during that war to be able to escape the tender mercies of al Qaeda and
others with long memories who are killing and torturing them. This bill
pulls the plug on that and condemns them to be left to the terrorists.
I think that is reprehensible. These are people who depended upon us,
who relied upon us. We have been working in a bipartisan way for 10
years to help them escape to safety, and this bill would slam that door
shut. You ought to be ashamed.
Mr. GOWDY. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Brendan F. Boyle).
Mr. BRENDAN F. BOYLE of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, this bill is a
great way for Congress to appear as if it is acting and achieving
something without actually doing anything.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be a member of the Foreign Affairs
Committee. We have had numerous hearings from the beginning of the
year, including yesterday, on this issue specifically.
One of the great challenges Western countries face is the problem of
homegrown terrorism. We saw that last week in Paris when the
overwhelming majority of those who perpetrated these acts were French
nationals and Belgian nationals.
So the big issue we face is: What do we do with those who hold
European passports and who can come here easily by getting a plane
ticket? What do we do with the problem of homegrown terrorism here in
the U.S. among American citizens? Those are the key challenges we face
in how we balance our civil liberties, our need for tourism, our need
for economic bilateral relations, with our need for security. This bill
sadly today does absolutely nothing about that.
So we are going to pass this bill. We are going to pat ourselves on
the back. We are going to go home and say we did something when
actually we have done nothing to solve the problem and protect the
security of the American people.
{time} 1300
Mr. GOWDY. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from California (Mr. Becerra).
Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, the safety of our fellow Americans, and
America itself, is and must be our number one priority, our number one
responsibility here in this Chamber. The people of America have a right
to expect--indeed, demand--exactly that.
Our national security screening and background system for refugees is
the toughest in the world. That is why so few refugees from Syria have
ever been able to receive their clearance to be accepted into this
country.
But then Paris, November 13, happened. Terror reigns and fear
spreads, including here. We are reminded of 9/11. If I believed that
this rushed legislation made our toughest of refugee screening systems
work better, I would vote for it. If this rushed legislation only adds
another layer of bureaucracy that makes our screening process look
tougher and then results in denying women and children who are fleeing
the very terrorists we seek to keep out a chance to seek that refuge
here in this country, then I cannot support that.
Our tradition and our values open our door, as in the past, to those
who fled Europe to start this country in the first place. It is up to
us to do this courageously and do it right, not with rushed
legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote.
Mr. GOWDY. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Tennessee (Mr. Cohen), a member of the Committee on the Judiciary.
[[Page H8390]]
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Speaker, this bill is here without having gone through
committee. It is not our normal process. It is considered an emergency.
It is not an emergency. Refugees will not get in this country for 1\1/
2\ to 2 years from the time they apply.
We could come back and look at the Democratic bill, of which I am a
cosponsor, that incorporates Mr. King's amendment to prevent terrorists
or people on the terrorist list from getting guns, and get a Democratic
and Republican bill that we might find we could agree on.
Instead, we are doing this for politics, and we are doing it by
continuing to use the pinata of President Barack Hussein Obama. This is
an attack on the President, who has a responsibility to defend us, and
his team is doing it. This doesn't add anything to it. It doesn't make
us safer. It is simply a political way to attack the President, and it
is wrong.
Mr. Speaker, that is why I will be voting ``no.''
Mr. GOWDY. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time remains for both
sides.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Duncan of Tennessee). The gentleman from
South Carolina has 2 minutes remaining. The gentleman from Michigan has
4 minutes remaining.
Mr. GOWDY. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time
until such time as my friend from Michigan has closed.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record from today's New
York Times Editorial Board, noted today, ``Refugees From War Aren't the
Enemy.'' It includes, ``this measure represents election-year pandering
to the xenophobia that rears up when threats from abroad arise. People
who know these issues--law enforcement and intelligence professionals,
immigration officials and humanitarian groups--say that this
wrongheaded proposal simply would not protect Americans from `foreign
enemies.' ''
[From the New York Times, Nov. 18, 2015]
Refugees From War Aren't the Enemy
(By The Editorial Board)
The House is expected to vote Thursday on H.R. 4038, the
American Security Against Foreign Enemies (SAFE) Act of 2015,
which Republican sponsors say ``would put in place the most
robust national-security vetting process in history'' for
refugees, one that would ``do everything possible to prevent
terrorists from reaching our shores.''
Conceived partly in response to the Paris attacks, the bill
seeks to ``pause'' admission of Syrian and Iraqi refugees.
Though there are real fears of terrorism, this measure
represents election-year pandering to the xenophobia that
rears up when threats from abroad arise. People who know
these issues--law enforcement and intelligence professionals,
immigration officials and humanitarian groups--say that this
wrongheaded proposal simply would not protect Americans from
``foreign enemies.''
One of the bill's chief sponsors, Representative Michael
McCaul of Texas, chairman of the House committee overseeing
the Department of Homeland Security, surely knows how federal
protocols for admitting refugees work. Yet the bill
disregards the complicated current process, which already
requires that applicants' histories, family origins, and law
enforcement and past travel and immigration records be vetted
by national security, intelligence, law enforcement and
consular officials. This process can take 18 months to two
years for each person.
Among other hurdles, the measure would require that the
secretary of homeland security, the director of the F.B.I.
and the director of national intelligence personally certify
that every refugee from Syria and Iraq seeking resettlement
here is not a threat. That's a lot of women, children, and
old people.
Moreover, this bill ignores most of what the United States
has learned, since 9/11 and before, of how potential
terrorists actually reach these shores: such individuals more
often already live here, or they come via illegal means.
Unlike the refugees in Europe, those seeking resettlement in
the United States must apply from abroad. They don't arrive
until formally admitted, and about half of those seeking
refugee status are approved.
So far, half of the Syrian refugees accepted into the
United States, officials say, have been children, and another
quarter are over 60 years old. Roughly half are female, and
many of those applying from abroad are multigenerational
families, often with the primary breadwinner missing. About 2
percent are single males of combat age.
Given these facts, it is fair to say that the people who
will be denied resettlement by this bill would be the victims
of war, people who have been tortured and threatened by the
same jihadists the United States now battles. They are
families, they are old people and they are children, who
might be given a chance for an education and a future.
This is a frightening time for Europe, and for the United
States. Should this bill reach his desk, President Obama is
more than likely to veto it because it has little to do with
fighting global terror. It is sad that this proposal has been
described as a first chance for the new speaker of the House,
Paul Ryan, to cooperate with the Senate. This bill doesn't
reflect who Americans are, and congressional leaders should
have the good sense to realize that.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Lofgren), a member of the Committee on the Judiciary.
Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I have listened to all of this debate with
keen interest, and it is with a sense of great sadness that we were
unable to come up with a bipartisan bill today.
I would like to note, however, that a bill was introduced by myself
and the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Thompson) that actually is much
tougher than the bill before us. It would relate to all refugees in
terms of their identity and their excludability--including Nigerians
because we are worried about Boko Haram and Somalians because we may be
worried about al Shabaab--and that is a tougher approach. I recommend
it.
But we also took good ideas from Mr. McCaul's bill. It is a good idea
to do some sampling on the IG. It is a good idea to have some reporting
to the committees. Unfortunately, our bill was not made in order; but
it is a stronger bill that incorporates the good ideas from the
Republican bill and a smarter approach to deal with the threat.
Mr. GOWDY. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record letters of
opposition to H.R. 4038.
White House Statement of Administration Policy
h.r. 4038--american safe act of 2015
(Rep. McCaul, R-TX, and Rep. Hudson, R-NC)
The Administration's highest priority is to ensure the
safety and security of the American people. That is why
refugees of all nationalities, including Syrians and Iraqis,
considered for admission to the United States undergo the
most rigorous and thorough security screening of anyone
admitted into the United States. This legislation would
introduce unnecessary and impractical requirements that would
unacceptably hamper our efforts to assist some of the most
vulnerable people in the world, many of whom are victims of
terrorism, and would undermine our partners in the Middle
East and Europe in addressing the Syrian refugee crisis. The
Administration therefore strongly opposes H.R. 4038.
The current screening process involves multiple Federal
intelligence, security, and law enforcement agencies,
including the National Counterterrorism Center, the Federal
Bureau of Investigation, and the Departments of Homeland
Security (DHS), State, and Defense, all aimed at ensuring
that those admitted do not pose a threat to our country.
These safeguards include biometric (fingerprint) and
biographic checks, medical screenings, and a lengthy
interview by specially trained DHS officers who scrutinize
the applicant's explanation of individual circumstances to
assess whether the applicant meets statutory requirements to
qualify as a refugee and that he or she does not present
security concerns to the United States. Mindful of the
particular conditions of the Syria crisis, Syrian refugees--
who have had their lives uprooted by conflict and continue to
live amid conditions so harsh that many set out on dangerous,
often deadly, journeys seeking new places of refuge--go
through additional forms of security screening, including a
thorough pre-interview analysis of each individual's refugee
application. Additionally, DHS interviewers receive
extensive, Syria-specific training before meeting with
refugee applicants. Of the 2,174 Syrian refugees admitted to
the United States since September 11, 2001, not a single one
has been arrested or deported on terrorism-related grounds.
The certification requirement at the core of H.R. 4038 is
untenable and would provide no meaningful additional security
for the American people, instead serving only to create
significant delays and obstacles in the fulfillment of a
vital program that satisfies both humanitarian and national
security objectives. No refugee is approved for travel to the
United States under the current system until the full array
of required security vetting measures have been completed.
Thus, the substantive result sought through this draft
legislation is already embedded into the program. The
Administration recognizes the importance of a strong,
evolving security screening in our refugee admissions program
and devotes considerable resources to continually improving
the Nation's robust security screening protocols. The
measures called for in this bill would divert resources from
these efforts.
Given the lives at stake and the critical importance to our
partners in the Middle East and Europe of American leadership
in
[[Page H8391]]
addressing the Syrian refugee crisis, if the President were
presented with H.R. 4038, he would veto the bill.
____
Dear Members of Congress: The National Immigration Law
Center (NILC) urges you to vote no on H.R. 4308. Our nation's
refugee laws and programs already include intense security
screening and no legislation is required. Our nation would be
turning its back on its most fundamental values if we were to
adopt measures that hinder or unnecessarily restrict refugee
admissions to the U.S.
Congress does not need to impose new mandates, like H.R.
4038, that would effectively freeze refugee resettlement
programs for Syrian, Iraqi or any other refugees. Screening
and security measures for refugee admissions are the most
robust and thorough in the nation. The agencies directly
involved in security screening for refugees are continually
reassessing and updating their procedures to keep in line
with technology and intelligence resources. The White House
has also stated its opposition to H.R. 4038.
Proposals like H.R. 4038--along with others that
unnecessarily mandate additional burdens on our refugee
resettlement programs--are attempts to demonize refugees who
are fleeing some of the most dangerous and devastating
conditions in the world and to discredit our nation's long-
standing and successful refugee resettlement programs that
have welcomed and reunited refugee families from around the
world.
We urge you to vote NO on H.R. 4038 which would halt and
likely delay for months, years or more the Syrian and Iraqi
refugee programs.
Sincerely,
Avideh Moussavian,
Economic Justice Policy Attorney,
National Immigration Law Center.
____
Refugee Council USA,
Washington, DC, November 18, 2015.
Dear Representative: On behalf of Refugee Council USA
(RCUSA), a coalition of 20 non-governmental organizations
committed to refugee protection and welcome, I write to you
today to urge you to protect Syrian and Iraqi refugees and
the integrity of the United States refugee resettlement
program by voting NO on H.R. 4038--The American Security
Against Foreign Enemies Act 2015.
Since 1975, the United States has resettled more than 3
million refugees from around the world, including 169,000
from Bosnia and more than 100,000 from Iraq. Three quarters
of a million of those refugees entered the U.S. since 2001.
During that time, there have been no recorded terrorist acts
in the United States by a refugee. That should come as little
surprise. Refugees are, by definition, people fleeing from
persecution--not persecutors themselves.
H.R. 4038 creates a bureaucratic review process that could
take years to implement and would effectively shut down
refugee resettlement. The bill requires the Secretary of
Homeland Security to ``certify'' whether an individual
refugee is a threat or not after ``concurrence'' with the
Directors of the FBI and DNI. The bill does not provide
guidance on what the process for certification will be. This
process will have to be created and agreed upon by three
heads of agencies. Establishing such a process could take
years, and in the meantime, refugees who could be resettled
would languish in camps and dangerous situations, Syrian
Americans would not be able to reunite with their family
members, and there would be very real ramifications for
international refugee protection and U.S. foreign policy
interests in the region.
The process, once established, would add months or years to
the security screening process, which is already the
lengthiest and most robust in the world, routinely taking
between 18 and 36 months. Obtaining the concurrence of three
heads of federal agencies for each refugee would take years
and effectively put an end to the refugee resettlement
program. For reasons of security and safety, security and
medical clearances are only valid for limited periods of
time. During the certification process, these clearances will
expire. This will mean that refugees will be caught in an un-
ending loop of security clearances that will never end.
The bill requires reporting to thirteen congressional
committees on each refugee that is considered for
resettlement. This is unreasonably burdensome and will
further delay the admission of refugees, cause security
clearances to expire, and effectively end the program.
Refugees are already the most vetted non-citizens in our
country. All refugees undergo thorough and rigorous security
screenings prior to arriving in the United States, including
but not limited to multiple biographic and identity
investigations; FBI biometric checks of applicants'
fingerprints and photographs; in-depth, in-person interviews
by well-trained Department of Homeland Security officers;
medical screenings; investigations by the National
Counterterrorism Center; and other checks by U.S. domestic
and international intelligence agencies. Supervisory review
of all decisions; random case assignment; inter-agency
national security teams; trained document experts; forensic
testing of documents; and interpreter monitoring are in place
to maintain the security of the refugee resettlement program.
Due to technological advances, Syrian refugees are also
undergoing iris scans to confirm their identity through the
process.
The bill is a waste of resources. Funds used to establish
and run this certification process would be better used in
conducting actual security reviews of refugees and others who
are vetted by these agencies.
The bill is a pretext and requires differential treatment
of refugees from Syria and Iraq without providing a
justification for the additional verification. It is a
disguised attempt to stop refugees from two countries long
beset by internal conflict, including refugees who have been
in neither Syria nor Iraq for four years. Differential
treatment, with no clear justification, amounts to
discrimination on the basis of nationality without rational
basis.
No terrorist attacks in the US have been committed by
refugees. The few non-citizens who have caused harm have come
to the US as tourists or through other means. This bill will
tell the world that the US has no interest in being part of
the global solution to protect the victims of the violence in
Syria and Iraq. It will keep US citizen family members of
these refugees from reuniting with their loved ones who are
in danger. This bill does nothing to keep the country safe,
is a waste of tax dollars, and is an attack on refugees and
immigrants--both those who are seeking safety and those who
are already here.
For these reasons we ask that you vote ``no'' on H.R. 4038.
We also want to draw your attention to the attached letter
signed yesterday by 81 national organizations in support of
Syrian refugees.
We appreciate your support in protecting the refugees.
Sincerely,
Melanie Nezer,
Chair, Refugee Council USA.
____
The Leadership Conference on
Civil and Human Rights,
Washington, DC, November 19, 2015.
Oppose H.R. 4038's Refugee Policy ``Reforms''.
Dear Representative: On behalf of The Leadership Conference
on Civil and Human Rights, we write to express our strong
opposition to H.R. 4038, the ``American Security Against
Foreign Enemies Act of 2015.'' This bill would effectively
end the admission of refugees from Syria and Iraq, while
doing virtually nothing to improve ``American security
against foreign enemies,'' as the name suggests. It is an
illogical, poorly considered proposal that is simultaneously
far too broad and far too narrow.
Under our current system, refugees resettled in the United
States undergo more security vetting than immigrants or
visitors who come here through any other channel, and more
than refugees who are resettled in any other country in the
world. Yet under H.R. 4038, and after we have already
resettled 3 million refugees from around the world since 1975
(including 100,000 from Iraq), Congress has just this week
concluded that our security screening procedures are
insufficient. In their place, H.R. 4038 would institute new
screening procedures for Syrian and Iraqi refugees--
procedures which are poorly defined, but which would take
years to fully implement.
The practical impact of H.R. 4038's onerous new
requirements would be to prevent any refugees from either of
these two countries from being admitted for the foreseeable
future. Meanwhile, only five days after the terrorist attacks
in Paris, French President Francois Hollande has stated that
France will honor its commitment to admit 30,000 refugees
from war-torn Syria--three times more than President Obama
had proposed to admit.
At the same time that H.R. 4038 would cause us to cede our
decades-long moral high ground in protecting refugees, we
struggle to comprehend precisely how it would make America
safer. If the assumption behind H.R. 4038 is that Iraqi and
Syrian citizens somehow pose a greater threat than citizens
of other countries, this bill does not affect the admissions
of immigrants or nonimmigrant visitors via other legal
channels. If the assumption behind the bill is that refugees
somehow pose a greater threat than other types of immigrants,
this bill only affects refugee admissions from two countries.
We are certainly not suggesting that H.R. 4038 be expanded
in any way. But the narrow scope of the bill does make us
wonder exactly what the sponsors are hoping to accomplish
through its enactment. We should note that few of the
terrorists who attacked Paris last week, and none of the
hijackers who attacked our country on September 11, 2001,
would have been prevented from entering the United States
under the provisions of this bill.
Again, we urge you to oppose this bill. If you have any
questions, please contact either of us, or Senior Counsel Rob
Randhava.
Sincerely,
Wade Henderson,
President & CEO.
Nancy Zirkin,
Executive Vice President.
____
[From MoveOn.org, Nov. 18, 2015]
MoveOn Responds to Obama's Veto Threat of House Refugee Bill
(By Brian Stewart)
Anna Galland, executive director of MoveOn.org Civic
Action, had the following statement in response to news that
President Obama would veto a House bill that
[[Page H8392]]
would make it more difficult for vetted refugees to be
admitted to the United States:
``We stand strongly with President Obama on this one.
MoveOn members will fight vigorously to uphold the principles
of welcome and compassion that are engraved on the Statue of
Liberty, and against the xenophobic, hateful, and
counterproductive rhetoric and proposals we've heard this
week from some--primarily Republican--politicians.
``We will work to help defend the United States' essential
program for resettling refugees, many of whom are fleeing
from threats of terrorism to save their lives and protect
their children. We urge Congress, and in particular every
Democrat, to show courage and compassion in keeping our doors
open to refugees in need--and to opening them wider in this
moment of crisis.''
Since Tuesday, more than 115,000 people have signed state-
and local-level petitions on MoveOn.org opposing bans on
Syrian refugees.
____
Christian Reformed Church,
November 19, 2015.
CRCNA Statement to the U.S. House of Representatives' record on the
American Security Against Foreign Enemies Act of 2015
As Executive Director of the Christian Reformed Church in
North America, I lament the attacks in Beirut, Baghdad, and
Paris on November 12 and 13 and would like to express my
grief for the victims and their families.
In the wake of these attacks, anti-refugee sentiment has
greatly increased throughout the world. Refugees--who are
fleeing from the violence of terrorism--should not be
scapegoated for these extreme acts of violence. As
Christians, we must speak clearly and loudly: we are called
to welcome the stranger, protect the vulnerable, and love
fearlessly. We are called to respond with love even amidst
our fear.
The world is still facing the largest refugee crisis in
recorded history. We must continue to have compassion for the
vulnerable individuals fleeing conflict in Syria. Refugees
already go through security screenings that can take up to
1,000 days; unnecessary additions to the process would be
neither compassionate nor caring.
The Christian Reformed Church has a long history of
welcoming the vulnerable and helping to resettle refugees in
safe communities. The CRCNA pledges to fully participate in
resettling Syrians of all religions during this current
crisis as it has done with refugees from Iraq, Afghanistan,
Cambodia, Cuba, Vietnam, and elsewhere.
Sincerely,
Dr. Steve Timmermans,
Executive Director, CRCNA.
____
American Civil Liberties Union,
Washington, DC, November 18, 2015.
Re Oppose H.R. 4038, the ``American Security Against Foreign
Enemies Act of 2015.''
Dear Representative: The American Civil Liberties Union
strongly urges you to oppose H.R. 4038, the ``American
Security Against Foreign Enemies Act of 2015,'' or ``American
SAFE Act of 2015'' (H.R. 4038). A vote on the bill is
scheduled to take place on Thursday, November 19, 2015. The
ACLU urges you to vote NO on H.R. 4038. The ACLU will score
this vote.
I. H.R. 4038 creates bureaucratic obstacles to end U.S.
acceptance of refugees from Syria and Iraq without any
demonstrated public-safety benefit.
H.R. 4038 creates a bureaucratic-review process that likely
would effectively shut down resettlement of refugees from
Syria and Iraq. The bill mandates new certifications and
undefined background investigations for all refugees who are
nationals or residents of Iraq or Syria, and many who are
not. Under H.R. 4038, all refugees deemed to originate from
Iraq or Syria--including anyone who has been in either
country at any time in the last four and a half years--may
only be admitted to the U.S. after the Director of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Secretary of Homeland
Security, and the Director of National Intelligence
unanimously concur that the refugee has cleared an additional
background investigation on top of what the Attorney General
this week testified is ``significant and robust'' security
screening. There has been no need expressed by federal
intelligence or law-enforcement agencies for such an
unprecedented clearance process, which could take years to
operationalize and does not add any public-safety benefit for
the U.S. population. In short, H.R. 4038 would bring the U.S.
resettlement process of Syrian and Iraqi refugees to a
grinding halt.
II. H.R. 4038 would result in unjustified discrimination
against refugees from Syria and Iraq based on their
nationality, national origin, and religion.
It is wrong and un-American to condemn groups without
reason solely based on their nationality, national origin,
religion, or other protected grounds. The proposed
certification and background investigation requirements in
H.R. 4038 would only apply to refugees deemed to be from Iraq
or Syria, and not other countries. The bill sponsors have
provided no sufficient reason for additional certification
and investigation requirements to justify the differential
treatment of refugees from Syria and Iraq, or even defined
how that differential treatment would improve current
practice. H.R. 4038, therefore, amounts to impermissible
discrimination on the basis of nationality and national
origin without a rational basis.
The extra certification and investigation requirements in
H.R. 4038 would disproportionately harm Muslim refugees
seeking protection in the U.S. According to the Refugee
Processing Center, 96 percent of Syrian refugees admitted to
the U.S. since the Syrian civil war began in 2011 are Muslim,
while over 60 percent of Iraqi refugees admitted since the
Iraq war began in 2003 are Muslim. Muslim refugees would
disproportionately suffer the consequences of this
discriminatory bill, as they would be denied entry to the
U.S. and forced to languish in refugee camps for years on
end.
III. H.R. 4038 is an attack on vulnerable refugees from
Syria and Iraq, both those seeking protection and those
already residing in the U.S.
Not only is H.R. 4038 an attack against refugees from Syria
and Iraq, but it would also harm those refugees' family
members who are already in the U.S. and eagerly awaiting to
be reunified with their loved ones. This bill would subject
those families to an interminable wait and would prolong
unnecessary suffering for both the refugees seeking
protection and those family members waiting in the U.S.
Moreover, the bill's very name, the ``American Security
Against Foreign Enemies Act,'' would worsen stigmatization of
Syrian and Iraqi refugees--and, more broadly, scapegoat all
refugees--fanning the flames of discriminatory exclusion here
and abroad.
IV. Conclusion
The ACLU urges the House to vote NO on H.R. 4038. For more
information, please contact ACLU Legislative Counsel Joanne
Lin.
Sincerely,
Karin Johanson,
Director, Washington Legislative Office.
Joanne Lin,
Legislative Counsel.
Chris Rickerd,
Policy Counsel.
____
Asian Americans Advancing Justice,
November 18, 2015.
Dear Representative: Asian Americans Advancing Justice
(Advancing Justice) is a national partnership of five
nonprofit, non-partisan organizations that work to advance
the human and civil rights of Asian Americans and Pacific
Islanders through advocacy, public policy, public education,
and litigation. We are based in Washington D.C., Atlanta,
Chicago, Los Angeles, and San Francisco. We write to urge you
to vote NO on H.R. 4038, The American Security Against
Foreign Enemies Act of 2015 (American SAFE Act of 2015).
We are all shocked and saddened by the recent attacks in
Paris and elsewhere but now is not the time to close our
hearts and our state to people fleeing violence and terror.
We must be careful not to act impulsively in response to
recent violence and we must be vigilant against enacting
policies targeting people based on their national origin or
religion. Due to the legacy of the internment of Japanese
Americans in WWII and the treatment of Arab, Middle Eastern
and South Asian after 9/11, the Asian American community is
all too familiar with hasty actions based on discrimination
and fear.
Protecting national security and public safety is important
to all of us, but we should not let fear and prejudice guide
our decisions about whom to welcome to America. The refugee
resettlement program is already the most difficult way to
enter the United States, routinely taking individuals several
years to be processed. All refugees undergo thorough and
rigorous security screenings prior to arriving in the United
States, including but not limited to multiple biographic and
identity investigations; FBI biometric checks; in-depth, in-
person interviews by Department of Homeland Security
officers; medical screenings; investigations by the National
Counterterrorism Center, and other checks by U.S. domestic
and international intelligence agencies. In addition, other
measures such as mandatory supervisory review of all
decisions, random case assignment, and forensic document
testing are in place to maintain the security of the refugee
resettlement program.
H.R. 4038 creates a bureaucratic review process that could
take years to implement and would effectively shut down
refugee resettlement. The bill requires the Secretary of
Homeland Security to ``certify'' whether an individual
refugee is a threat or not after ``concurrence'' with the
Directors of the FBI and National Intelligence. The bill does
not provide guidance on what the process for certification
will be. This process will have to be created and agreed upon
by three heads of agencies. Establishing such a process could
take years, and in the meantime, refugees who could be
resettled would languish in camps and dangerous situations,
Syrian Americans would not be able to reunite with their
family members, and there would be very real ramifications
for international refugee protection and U.S. foreign policy
interests in the region.
The process, once established, would add months or years to
the security screening process, which is already the
lengthiest and most robust in the world, routinely taking
between 18 and 36 months. Obtaining the concurrence of three
heads of federal agencies for each refugee would take years
and effectively put an end to the refugee resettlement
program. For reasons of security and safety, security and
medical clearances are only valid for limited periods of
time.
[[Page H8393]]
During the certification process, these clearances will
expire. This will mean that refugees will be caught in an un-
ending loop of security clearances that will never end.
The bill also requires reporting to more than a dozen
congressional committees on each refugee that is considered
for resettlement. This is unreasonably burdensome and a waste
of resources. Funds used to establish and run this
certification process would be better used in conducting
actual security reviews of refugees and others who are vetted
by these agencies.
This bill is merely a pretext for discriminatory treatment
of refugees from Syria and Iraq without providing a
justification for the additional verification. America should
remain a place of safety for people seeking refuge and peace
from around the globe. We strongly urge you to vote no on H.R
4038 and reject similar proposals that would limit or impose
unnecessary processes that effectively prevent future
refugees from coming to the United States.
If you have questions about our recommendation, please
contact Erin Oshiro at Asian Americans Advancing Justice-
AAJC. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Stewart Kwoh,
President & Executive Director, Advancing Justice, Los
Angeles.
Christopher Punongbayan,
Executive Director, Advancing Justice, Asian Law Caucus.
Mee Moua,
President & Executive Director, Advancing Justice, AAJC.
Tuyet Le,
Executive Director, Advancing Justice, Chicago.
Helen Kim Ho,
Executive Director, Advancing Justice, Atlanta.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
Florida (Ms. Frankel).
Ms. FRANKEL of Florida. Mr. Speaker, our folks back home are
understandably frightened, and there is no question that ISIL must be
destroyed and that the safety of Americans must be our first priority.
But denying refuge to women and children who are fleeing rape and
torture and who go through a 2-year vigorous entry process will not
make us a safer country.
At a time when we are trying to forge a coalition of international
nations, it is self-defeating to send a message of isolation. Our
antiterrorism resources must be focused on terrorists, not on innocent
human beings seeking shelter from the most unspeakable horrors.
Mr. CONYERS. I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, Members of the committee and of the House, instead of
slamming our doors to the world's most vulnerable, we should be
considering legislation to strengthen and expand refugee programs.
Unfortunately, the bill before us today is not a serious effort to
legislate, and it will not make us safer. It is a knee-jerk reaction,
as evidenced by the fact that this measure was introduced just 2 days
ago and has not been the subject of a single hearing or any meaningful
review by our committee.
Rather than betraying our values, we must continue to focus on the
most effective tools to keep us safe, while providing refuge for the
world's most vulnerable. Accordingly, I plead with, I urge my
colleagues to please oppose H.R. 4038.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. GOWDY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, it seems commonsensical that when it comes to national
security and public safety, we should listen to and rely upon the women
and men who are actually experts and have dedicated their lives to
public safety and national security.
Mr. Speaker, this is a fact: We don't have sufficient information to
appropriately investigate and vet failed nation-states.
This is a fact: ISIS has sworn to bring its war against innocents
here.
This is a fact: Administration officials noted ISIS may well use the
refugee program to infiltrate our country.
This is also a fact, Mr. Speaker: The margin for error is zero. It is
zero. The presumption should always be in favor of national security
and public safety because that is the preeminent role of government,
and it is our constitutional duty, Mr. Speaker.
So unless and until those we place in charge of our national security
and public safety can provide the necessary assurances, we should seek
to aid those who need aid where they are.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, the President says that we are scared of
widows and orphans. That is what passes for debate in this day and age.
With all due respect to the President, what we are really afraid of,
Mr. Speaker, is a foreign policy that produces so many widows and
orphans.
He is the Commander in Chief, Mr. Speaker. His job is to make our
homes safer. He could also make the homeland of the refugees safer. He
could restore order to the region, and he can defeat that JV team that
he once thought he had contained. That would be the very best thing we
could do for those who aspire to a better, safer life.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I submit the following letters from the
U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and First Focus Campaign for
Children.
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Committee
on Migration,
Washington, DC, November 19, 2015.
Dear Representative: On behalf of the U.S. Conference of
Catholic Bishops (USCCB), I write to oppose passage of H.R.
4038, the American Security Against Foreign Enemies Act of
2015.
As you know, the legislation would suspend the resettlement
of refugees from Syrian and Iraq until a procedure could be
established whereby the Secretary of the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) would certify--with concurrence of
the FBI director and the Director of National Intelligence--
that each refugee is not a terrorist threat. It also would
require that the current or a future Administration report to
thirteen congressional committees on each refugee that is
considered for resettlement. These requirements would keep
many deserving refugees in danger for an extended period of
time, at risk of their lives, but would not necessarily make
the process a more effective one.
The U.S. Catholic bishops acknowledge and support the right
of our government to defend our nation and to ensure that the
American people are safe. However, we believe that this
legislation is designed to severely limit, if not end, the
resettlement of Syrians or Iraqis to the United States,
including vulnerable women and children, the elderly, and
religious minorities fleeing violence and death, including
Christians. It also would impact Iraqis who may have been
forced to flee to Syria during the Iraqi war, even those who
may have supported our troops.
The current security process for Syrian refugees can take
up to 24 months or longer, as refugees go through several
interviews and 5 security clearance reviews. Refugees go
through more security checks than any arrival to our nation.
Since 2001, the United States has resettled 784,000 refugees
under this process and there has not been a single terrorist
act committed by a refugee admitted into the country.
The U.S. refugee program is an example of a successful
private-public partnership which has enjoyed bipartisan
support for decades. Presidents from both political parties
have supported, and, at times, expanded the program to
respond to humanitarian crises originating from global
conflicts, including President Gerald R. Ford after the
Vietnam War, President Bill Clinton after the Bosnian
conflict, and President George W. Bush after the Iraqi War.
H.R. 4038 represents a threat to this tradition and to our
moral leadership in the world.
Instead of imposing additional bureaucratic processes upon
the current stringent security system through the adoption of
H.R. 4038, we encourage you to work with the Administration
to strengthen it, without suspending the program. I also ask
that you work with your colleagues and the Administration to
end the Syrian conflict peacefully so the 4 million Syrian
refugees can return to their country and rebuild their homes.
Until that goal is achieved we must work with the world
community to provide safe haven to vulnerable refugees who
are simply attempting to survive. H.R. 4038 abdicates our
moral responsibility in this area and must be defeated.
Thank you for your consideration of our views.
Sincerely,
Most Reverend Eusebio Elizondo,
Auxiliary Bishop of Seattle, WA,
Chairman.
____
First Focus
Campaign for Children,
Washington, DC, November 19, 2015.
Dear Member: On behalf of First Focus Campaign for
Children, a national bipartisan advocacy organization
dedicated to making children and families a priority in
federal policy and budget decisions, I write to you today to
strongly urge that you oppose the American SAFE Act (H.R.
4038). This bill would immediately prevent all refugees from
Syria and Iraq from entering the United States and makes the
process for their entry considerably more difficult.
The American SAFE Act creates a much more stringent,
discriminatory process for
[[Page H8394]]
refugees from Syria and Iraq to gain entry into the United
States. These populations would be singled out and could not
be admitted until the Director of the FBI, the Secretary of
DHS and the Director of the National Intelligence have
received a background investigation that is deemed sufficient
to determine whether the refugee is a threat. This process is
fraught with complications as thousands of refugee children
and their families will remain in limbo indefinitely and
agencies would have to use significant resources to
coordinate investigations and create new criteria for who can
be admitted. The United States already has much tougher
protections than European nations, evident in the fact that
all refugees are screened for 18-24 months before stepping
foot in the U.S. and face the highest level security
screening of any traveler or immigrant.
Those fleeing from violence in Syria are amongst the most
vulnerable in the world. Over 50% of those who have entered
the United States are children and a quarter are over the age
of 60. By adding an unnecessary layer of bureaucracy to the
screening process, the United States would be jeopardizing
the lives of thousands of innocent children who have
committed no crime other than to be born in a country rife
with instability and susceptible to unspeakable acts of
terrorism. These children have already experienced a great
deal of trauma and creating barriers for safety will only
make their situations more desperate.
America has a proud history of providing refuge for those
in need, and this bill runs contrary to our most fundamental
values of compassion and fairness. Thus, we strongly urge you
to oppose HR 4038 as it further undermines the safety of
millions of children who are seeking protection from the very
terrorism we are seeking to defeat.
Sincerely,
Bruce Lesley,
President.
____
Dear Members of Congress: The National Immigration Law
Center (NILC) urges you to vote no on HR 4038. Our nation's
refugee laws and programs already include intense security
screening and no legislation is required. Our nation would be
turning its back on its most fundamental values if we were to
adopt measures that hinder or unnecessarily restrict refugee
admissions to the U.S.
Congress does not need to impose new mandates, like HR
4038, that would effectively freeze refugee resettlement
programs for Syrian, Iraqi or any other refugees. Screening
and security measures for refugee admissions are the most
robust and thorough in the nation. The agencies directly
involved in security screening for refugees are continually
reassessing and updating their procedures to keep in line
with technology and intelligence resources. The White House
has also stated its opposition to HR 4038.
Proposals like HR 4038--along with others that
unnecessarily mandate additional burdens on our refugee
resettlement programs--are attempts to demonize refugees who
are fleeing some of the most dangerous and devastating
conditions in the world and to discredit our nation's long-
standing and successful refugee resettlement programs that
have welcomed and reunited refugee families from around the
world.
We urge you to vote NO on HR 4038 which would halt and
likely delay for months, years or more the Syrian and Iraqi
refugee programs.
Sincerely,
Avideh Moussavian.
Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I would like to
express my opposition to H.R. 4038, the American Security Against
Foreign Enemies Act. As a result of horrific terrorist attacks in
Paris, France and Beirut, Lebanon last week, many elected officials in
the United States are demanding that we stop admitting refugees fleeing
Syria or place strict restrictions upon their entrance. This rhetoric
is disheartening and disappointing. We are facing a global refugee
crisis that requires a global response.
With 60 million people displaced, the United States must do its part
to help protect and resettle vulnerable families and children who are
fleeing violence and persecution. While we must continue to ensure that
screening procedures are able to properly vet those seeking political
asylum in this country, I refuse to turn my back on innocent people who
are fleeing the atrocities in their homeland.
H.R. 4038 places unnecessary bureaucratic obstacles in front of
Syrian and Iraqi refugees without any demonstrated public safety
benefit and would result in completely unjustified discrimination based
on nationality, origin, and religion. This is not only wrong, it is not
American. H.R. 4038 also wrongly attacks vulnerable refugees who are
fleeing the same dangerous attacks that we fear so much here on
American soil.
While I do believe that we must remain vigilant in our safety
precautions, we cannot close our doors and our minds to the children
and families seeking protection, shelter, and safety. In Dallas, we
have always shown our compassion to those who seek safety. I refuse to
slam the door on a small fraction of the world's Syrian refugees. In
fact, 184 Syrian refugees have already been placed in Texas with more
than 1,500 across the nation and we will certainly welcome more.
We cannot turn our backs on those who fall victim to war, aggression,
and tenor. Instead, we must show compassion by promoting peace and
diplomacy. I urge my colleagues to vote against this divisive and
discriminatory legislation.
Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to HR. 4038.
In the aftermath of last week's barbaric ISIL terrorist attack in
Paris the Republican leadership of the U.S. House has decided that the
best way to protect the security of the American people is to attack
Syrian and Iraqi refugees. These are the innocent and vulnerable
children, parents, and elders who are seeking protection from murderous
armies, terrorist groups, and death squads.
The perpetrators of the Paris attack were ISIL radicals with European
citizenship, not refugees. As many as 3,000 European extremists have
traveled to Syria to join the ranks of ISIL. In fact, the ISIL
mastermind behind the Paris attack who was killed by French
authorities, Abdelhamid Abaaoud, was a Belgian citizen, not a refugee
from Syria or Iraq. Meanwhile, the U.S. visa waiver program allows
unrestricted access to the U.S. from the European Union which is an
open door for European extremists not on a watch list to enter our
country. In my view, this is where the real reform and intelligence
sharing must be strengthened.
The American Security Against Foreign Enemies Act (HR. 4038) is a
Republican ploy that is cruel, callous, and a blatant display of
xenophobia used to energize a political base that is motivated by a
hatred of immigrants. This legislation is not designed to protect our
national security interests, but rather will be used as a political
weapon to attack Democrats who still believe our nation should be a
safe haven for vulnerable people seeking freedom from persecution and
the threat of death.
I support resettling refugees in the U.S. and I have always welcomed
them to Minnesota. The most modem identification technology and
intelligence background checks need to be utilized in the resettlement
security process. That means this Republican Congress must act
responsibly and provide the necessary funding for such a comprehensive
screening protocol. I support appropriating full funding for these
strict protocols.
ISIL is a global scourge that must be eradicated. Keeping America
safe and eliminating ISIL will require intelligence, military, and
counter-terrorism coordination between the U.S. and all allies.
Unfortunately, H.R. 4038 is a transparent effort to scapegoat Syrian
and Iraqi refugees who have suffered immeasurably, but clearly not
enough for some of my colleagues. I reject this Republican bill as
another example of driving a political agenda based on willful
ignorance in the face of a serious terrorist threat.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in opposing H.R. 4038.
Ms. BONAMICI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 4038,
the American Security Against Foreign Enemies (SAFE) Act of 2015,
legislation that was introduced just 48 hours ago with no consideration
by any Committees of jurisdiction. In the wake of horrific terrorist
attacks across the globe, I understand and appreciate the concerns and
fear in our communities. We must recommit to keeping our country safe
and secure, but keeping our country safe and accepting refugees fleeing
war and terrorism are not mutually exclusive and never have been
throughout the history of our great nation.
The American SAFE Act would effectively bar refugees, many of whom
are women and children, from escaping violence and finding a safe haven
in our country. The United States already has an extremely rigorous
screening process for refugees that includes 18 to 24 months of
detailed background checks, screening, and interviews administered by
the Departments of State, Homeland Security, and Defense.
The President has committed to allowing an additional 10,000 refugees
into our country, and more than half of those are children. Our history
reflects a nation that thrives on diversity and is strengthened by the
contributions of immigrants, and in darker times, our history also
provides examples of where we have failed in the past, most notably
during the early years of World War II. The men, women, and especially
children who are seeking a better life and refuge from bullets and
bombs are counting on us. As an American and a mother, I urge my
colleagues not to respond to fear and political rhetoric by supporting
this bill and instead commit to a thoughtful debate that will
strengthen our national security policy without closing our border to
the world's most vulnerable.
Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I rise before you with
the words that are inscribed on our Statue of Liberty that reflects our
history of a nation of what America is, should be, and to become to
many people regardless of nationality, ethnicity, and creed (religious
belief). We are a nation of Native
[[Page H8395]]
Americans, descendants of slaves, and immigrants. Historically, these
words have not always reflected the true meaning of freedom through
time and periods of conflict.
The American Safe Act is a bill that attempts to infuse fear on
Americans about terrorism and would lead to slowing down the process of
resettlement in the Syria and Iraq region for the most vulnerable
refugees possibly for years to come.
History is a tool that we should always learn from and always seek to
build on the existence of our past to make America better and not a
spectator on the wrong side of history.
Remember what was said about the Japanese Americans during World War
II, when they were placed in internment camps. Fear was the reason and
rationale as to why specific citizens were looked on as enemy aliens
that needed to be put away to protect our national security and make
America safe from danger of foreign influences.
Remember what happen to immigration quotas and restrictions of Jewish
refugees fleeing from a holocaust in Europe. Where American polls were
suggesting to not allow German and other political refugees from
entering America due to fear and concern of possible entry of German
agents among refugees.
What about the Haitians and Africans who are turned back or returned
to their country of origin while seeking refuge in America?
Mr. Speaker, Deja vu all over again, yes we should be cautious and
yet wise in our decisions that are temper with compassion and not fear
to reject a people in their greatest hour of need.
I submit the following Statue of Liberty Poem:
new colossus (statue of liberty poem)
Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name Mother of Exiles.
From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
``Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!'' cries she With
silent lips.
``Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!''
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, the entire goal of terrorists--in their
cowardly acts of violence against innocent and unsuspecting civilians--
is to cause death, chaos, bring intense fear and intimidate the global
community. We were victims of the most horrendous terrorist attacks on
9-11 and we all joined in feelings of renewed honor as we watched the
terrorist attacks in Paris.
We need to ensure that our response is both strong in purpose and
effective. We did that after 9-11. We put in place the most stringent
refugee resettlement program in the history of our country.
These are the facts:
Refugees are referred to the U.S. program after being screened by the
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees who first determines if
resettlement in a third country is the right solution.
The current U.S. screening process takes between 18-24 months. It
involves multiple Federal intelligence, security, and law enforcement
agencies, including the National Counterterrorism Center, the Federal
Bureau of Investigation, and the Departments of Homeland Security
(DHS), State, and Defense, all aimed at ensuring that those admitted do
not pose a threat to our country. These safeguards include biometric
(fingerprint) to confirm identity, multiple layers of biographical and
background checks, and medical screenings.
Specifically, each applicant's biographical information is checked
against the Department of State's Consular Lookout and Support System--
which includes terrorist watchlist information during prescreening.
Then, Security Advisory Opinions from the law enforcement and
intelligence communities for each applicant is secured.
All of this information helps to inform the lengthy in-person
interviews. DHS officers scrutinize the applicant's explanation of
individual circumstances to assess whether the applicant meets
statutory requirements to qualify as a refugee and that he or she does
not present security concerns to the United States. If as a result of
the security process, U.S. security agencies cannot verify details of a
potential refugee's story, they are denied. These checks happen before
an application is approved and long before a refugee would be able to
enter the United States.
And these are the facts on the refugees:
Refugees by definition are the most vulnerable people in our global
society. They are fleeing war, violence and persecution. In Syria
refugees are either fleeing the violence brought on by the civil war
and the violence of President Assad's army or the terror of ISIS
operating from there.
The emphasis for the U.S. program is to admit the most vulnerable--
particularly women and children, survivors of violence and torture, and
those with severe medical conditions. Since 2011, 2,034 Syrian refugees
have been admitted to the United States. A quarter of these refugees
are adults over 60. Half are children. Young, single males unattached
to families constitute only 2% of the Syrian refugee admissions to
date. DHS interviewers receive extensive, Syria-specific training
before meeting with refugee applicants.
Each Member of Congress takes very seriously our number-one
responsibility to protect the homeland. At times of crisis it is
crucial that we act in a bi-partisan fashion. Regrettably that was not
the process followed by the Republican Majority. They crafted the
legislation before us today on their own and with no hearings, no
expert testimony, no Committee markup, and no opportunity to offer
amendment
As a result, the legislation before us sets a partisan course, and is
being used mainly as a vehicle to criticize the President's foreign
policy. The current screening system has been working. This bill does
not improve it and could scramble up what is working. The legislation
would require the FBI to have their own additional and undefined
separate screening systems even though they currently fully participate
in the stringent process led by the Department of Homeland Security. We
created DHS after 9-11 to ensure the most effective system that brought
all of the resources of the federal government together to combat
terrorism. It does not seem wise to unwind that without thorough review
and consideration.
The threat of terrorism brings to all of us and to communities across
our country a sense of insecurity. It is our responsibility in Congress
to channel those feelings into effective solutions. The legislation
before us fails to do so. This bill would disrupt a screening process
that is working and, in so doing, would yield the moral high ground
that our country must hold at all costs if we are to defeat ISIS. We
can and must both fight terrorism and help the victims who seek to
escape it.
Mr. HONDA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to the
American SAFE Act of 2015 (H.R. 4038). This ill-advised, short-sighted,
closed-minded bill would immediately block all refugees from Syria and
Iraq from resettling in the U.S. and make the process for entry
significantly more challenging for those seeking refuge here.
Today, we are seeing the greatest number of refugees and displaced
persons since World War II. That fact alone is startling and
disheartening.
People do not uproot their lives and flee their homeland unless it is
for the most dire reasons. Who would choose to expose their children to
months of traveling on foot, with only the shirt on their back? The
families fleeing from the violence in Syria are the most vulnerable in
the world. The majority of the refugees are children and women who are
fleeing from their terror, sexual violence, and destruction.
History will remember this moment: when our nation decides whether we
will turn the most vulnerable away from our shores, or if we will stand
with humanity, be inclusive, and protect those who need our help the
most.
Mr. Speaker, I firmly oppose the American SAFE Act of 2015; it will
only compromise our moral standing in the world, as well as our
national security and safety.
Our Constitution is never tested during times of tranquility; it is
during times of tension, turmoil, tragedy, trauma, and terrorism that
it is sorely tested. We must not allow our anger and outrage toward
ISIL terrorists and their cowardly attacks on civilians to turn us away
from compassion and generosity. We must not shut our doors--not to the
Syrian refugees, or to anyone. We need to find ways to help them find
safe haven from the perpetrators of these acts of violence.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak in opposition to
H.R. 4038, the ``American Security Against Enemies Act of 2015''
(America SAFE Act).
This is the latest attempt to attack the President.
It is cheap and unworthy of this august body to engage in politics
when our aim should be lofty and thoughtful policy.
President Obama has accomplished tremendous successes in restoring
our nation's leadership and integrity around the world following the
disasters of the previous administration.
He inherited 2 wars including the Iraq war, an unprovoked and
unjustified invasion, which today is a strong contributing force to the
situation that exists in Iraq and Syria.
The President has led where others have only talked--he has used soft
power in an impressive and masterful way that thwarted Russia in its
ambitions, and to bring Iran to the
[[Page H8396]]
negotiation table resulting in the curbing of that nation's nuclear
weapon ambition.
Now the President's work to make sure that United States remains a
leader in the global community by meeting the obligation to receive
refugees from Syria and Iraq.
This bill is doing damage to our national interest.
The American SAFE Act requires a FBI background check for every
refugee from Iraq and Syria who apply for asylum in the United States.
In addition, H.R. 4038 provides that no refugee from Iraq or Syria
can be granted asylum in the United States unless the Director of the
FBI, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, and the
Director of National Intelligence each make an independent
determination and concur unanimously that the applicant for asylum
poses no threat to the national security of the United States.
I understand that the proponents of H.R. 4038 are responding to the
legitimate apprehensions of many Americans shocked by the horror and
carnage of the terrorist attacks that occurred last Friday, November
13, 2015, in Paris.
Mr. Speaker, this nation stands in unyielding solidarity with the
people of France, which like the United States, is one of the most
welcoming and freedom loving nations in the world.
Right now, our prayers are with the victims of the terrorist attacks
and their families.
Every American can empathize with the people of France because we
remember the terrible and heart-breaking events of September 11, 2001,
the first and worst attack by an enemy on American soil since Pearl
Harbor and which took the lives of more than 3,000 innocent persons.
On that day Americans of all races, religions, and creeds, in every
region of the country were united in their shock and sadness and anger.
But we were united in our resolve to help each other, to defend our
homeland, and bring to justice those responsible, and only those
responsible, for their crime against humanity.
In the 14 years since that heart-wrenching day, our nation has
learned much from our initial responses to the attacks of September 11;
we have a much better idea today of what types of actions work, which
do not, which go too far.
And the best way to honor those who lost or gave their lives on
September 11, and to the victims of terrorism in France and other peace
loving societies, is to apply the knowledge and wisdom we have gained
from experience to meet the challenges and threats the civilized world
faces today from radical jihadists.
Last September, the Homeland Security Committee, which I have served
on since its inception, held a hearing at Ground Zero during the week
marking the 14th Anniversary of the September 11.
Homeland Security Committee Chairman McCaul, Ranking Member Thompson
and Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on Immigration Ranking Member
Lofgren are dedicated public servants whose actions are always
motivated by their commitment to keep our nation safe and secure.
It is safe to say that this motivation is shared by every Member of
this House.
But that we all agree on the end to be achieved does not mean that we
always agree on the means that should be employed.
Mr. Speaker, this is one of those occasions because while I yield to
no one in my commitment to protecting the homeland and keeping the
American people safe, I cannot agree that H.R. 4038 achieves that goal
or is in the best interests of the United States.
On March 4, 1933, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt assured the
nation in his Inaugural Address that ``the only thing we have to fear
is fear itself--nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which
paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.''
I would not oppose this bill if I believed that it was needed.
This is not to say that the actions H.R. 4038 requires should never
be taken; only that they are not needed at this time and employing them
would not be an exercise of American leadership but of fear and
retreat.
Our nation is better than that.
But it is good that we are debating H.R. 4038 because it provides us
another opportunity to remember who we are, what we believe, and what
makes our nation exceptional.
ISIS/ISIL aspires to bring about a bi-polar world, one divided
between those Muslims who share their distorted and profaned
interpretation of one of the world's great religions on the one hand,
and everyone else on the other.
We in the United States seek a peaceful world in which every person
on earth is free to worship in peace, live in freedom, and enjoy the
blessings of liberty.
In other words, like the French, we believe in ``liberte, egalite,
fraternite'' (liberty, equality, and fraternity).
ISIS/ISIL would have none of this--the world they want is one where
murder can be justified because you do not believe as they would have
you believe or live as they would have you live.
Women and children, religious minorities--including other Muslim
beliefs that differ from their views, have suffered under ISIS/ISIL's
reign of terror.
The reign of terror unleashed by ISIS/ISIL is the source of refugees
who are fleeing from something so all-consuming and destructive that
they leave with nothing but their children in their arms and the
clothes on their bodies.
Before September 11, few Americans could imagine that kind of terror.
Our allies in Europe understand that kind of terror--from the stories
of those who sought refuge from the Nazis prior to and during World War
II and after the war when escaping the totalitarian states of the
Soviet-dominated Warsaw Pact.
Fear of the stranger has always existed, but civilization and
institutions ease that fear by providing law and order to people to
assure protection from want; violence; and war by expending resources
to address conditions that would result in those societal destabilizing
influences.
Each nation decides where it stands on principle, law, and
conscience.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4038 is not necessary at this time because our
nation already has in place the world's most rigorous screening process
for refugees seeking asylum.
Mr. Speaker, there are other alternatives to the draconian approach
of H.R. 4038, takes such as the bill introduced by Ranking Members
Thompson and Lofgren.
The President is another solution for those who seek reassurance that
every precaution is being taken--he is in a position to certify to the
Congress and the American people that the process is prudent and
careful in its actions regarding refugees seeking entrance into the
United States.
It is helpful to recount briefly the critical elements of that
screening process.
Every applicant for asylum must:
1. register with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees;
2. provide background information, including what caused him or her
to flee their home country (a ready means of comparing information
provided by more than one million refugees to further verify the
validity of the information provided);
3. meet one of five legal qualifications: threat of violence based on
race, religion or faith or national origin; political beliefs; or
membership in a targeted social group.
4. undergo a rigorous background check during which investigators
fact-check the refugee's biography to ensure consistency with published
or documented reports of events such as bombings or other violence;
5. be subjected to biometric tests conducted by the Department of
Defense, in conjunction with other federal agencies (the U.S. military
has an extensive biometric data base on Iraqis from its time in Iraq);
and
6. sit for intensive in-person interviews, which may take months or
years before they are conducted.
Mr. Speaker, over the past several years intelligence and law
enforcement agencies have established and perfected an intense form of
screening for Syrians called the ``Syrian Enhanced Review.''
If, during the screening process, a person from Syria gives response
that raise red flags he or she is selected for more intense examination
by U.S. intelligence agencies.
The demographic breakdown of those Syrians who have been approved for
refugee status to come to the United States is as follows: children,
50%; persons over the age of 60, 25%; combat age males, 2%.
Mr. Speaker, we must be careful not to engage in ethnic or religious
profiling.
Unless someone has been profiled it may be difficult to understand
what collective guilt looks, or worse, feels like when it is heaped
upon members of a group--no matter their age or their condition.
Here in America we have learned through bitter experience that it is
morally and politically wrong to regard an entire group of people as
unworthy of compassion, regard, concern, or consideration because of
their race or religion or ethnicity.
As I stated at the outset, I do not question the motives of those who
prevailed upon the
[[Page H8397]]
House leadership to rush this bill to the floor for a vote today.
H.R. 4038 was introduced on Tuesday, November 17, and is on the floor
for a vote less than 48 hours later, Thursday, November 19.
This is fast--too fast for such a serious decision and without
considering the arduous process that is in place to screen all refugees
not just those from Iraq and Syria.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4038 only addresses the refugee process for those
who are Iraqi and Syrian.
In its own way, it acknowledges that the process in place to vet
refugees is difficult so much so that no terrorist would choose it as a
means to enter the United States.
Unlike Europe where people from the Syrian and Iraqi conflict could
walk by land to Europe by the tens of thousands, the United States is
not accessible by foot.
We will not take any refugees who are now in Europe.
Our nation welcomes millions of tourist, business travelers, and
students from around the world at our airports and seaports each day.
The United States Refugee Asylum process is not comfortable and it
takes at a minimum 2 years.
The persons who apply must remain where they have registered until
the process is completed, which involves a series of in person
interviews, physical health status checks, collection of biometrics and
other data as well as investigations by law enforcement and
intelligence agencies.
The last thing a terrorist would want is to be a refugee--living in
the harsh environment of a refugee camp for two years.
Refugees are the victims of terrorists--ISIS/ISIL does not love
them--they want to murder every last one of them, because they will not
bow to them.
We should be stirred by the defiance and courage that refugees
exemplify--braving the unknown because they yearn to breathe free.
In truth ISIS/ISIL has killed more Muslims than any other group of
persons because they practice their faith as they see fit and refuse to
worship falsely.
This bill troubles me because it asks the impossible of professional
law enforcement, national security, and intelligence agency personnel--
by requiring a l00% guarantee that each person poses no threat.
No professional security or law enforcement professional will give
anyone a 100% guarantee about anything.
They will not provide a l00% guarantee because they believe that
something or someone is a threat--they will not provide a guarantee
because it is grossly unprofessional to do so and we should never ask
them to do this.
On its face H.R. 4038 would end any hope of asylum in the United
States for any refugee from Iraq or Syria.
If this is what the leadership wants then they should say it plainly
and have a debate about profiling as a national policy.
I cannot support this bill, but I am committed to working with my
colleagues on both sides of the aisle to find common ground.
THE SCREENING PROCESS FOR ENTRY TO THE UNITED STATES FOR SYRIAN
REFUGEES
Applicants register with the U.N. High Commissioner for
Refugees, or UNHCR, which collects identifying documents;
biodata, such as name, date of birth, and place of birth; and
biometrics, most commonly an iris scan.
UNHCR interviews applicants to confirm refugee status and
the need for resettlement. Biodata, biometrics, and
identifying documents are checked again.
Applicants fulfill criteria to be considered a refugee
under U.S. law and processing priority qualifications.
Applicants meet UNHCR resettlement requirements and are
referred to the United States for resettlement.
Applicants are received and interviewed by a Resettlement
Support Center, or RSC, operated by the U.S. Department of
State's Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration. The
RSC compiles information for the security clearance process
conducted by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, or
DHS.
Biographic and biometric checks: Refugee applicants are
vetted against law enforcement, intelligence community, and
other relevant databases to help confirm the applicants'
identity and check for any criminal or other derogatory
information.
First biographic check: Applicants are checked against the
U.S. State Department's Consular Lookout and Support System,
initiated at the time of prescreening by the RSC. Enhanced
interagency security checks also take place at this time.
Second biographic check: If applicants meet certain
criteria, the RSC requests Security Advisory Opinions from
the law enforcement and intelligence communities.
Third biographic check: If applicants are within a
designated age range, the National Counterterrorism Center
conducts an interagency check, or IAC. Initially, the IAC was
required only for Iraqi applicants but is now required for
all qualified refugee applicants.
First biometric check: Applicants' fingerprints and
photographs are taken by a trained U.S. government employee.
Fingerprints are screened against the FBI's Next Generation
Identification system.
Second biometric check: Applicants' fingerprints are
screened against the DHS Automated Biometric Identification
System, which contains watch-list information and previous
immigration encounters in the United States and overseas.
Third biometric check: If applicants are within a
designated age range, fingerprints are screened against the
U.S. Department of Defense Automated Biometric Identification
System, which includes fingerprint records captured in Iraq.
Syrian refugee applications are reviewed at U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services, or USCIS, headquarters
by a Refugee Affairs Division officer.
Applicants that meet certain criteria are referred to the
USCIS Fraud Detection and National Security Directorate for
additional review and research that is used by the
interviewing officer to inform lines of inquiry related to
applicants' eligibility and credibility.
USCIS interviews applicants in person while abroad to
determine whether or not they can be approved for
resettlement to the United States.
USCIS approves applicants for resettlement in the United
States.
Applicants undergo health screening to ensure that those
with a contagious disease do not enter the United States.
Applicants complete cultural orientation classes.
Applicants are matched with a U.S.-based resettlement
agency, a process called sponsorship assurance.
Applicants under a second interagency security check to
make sure no new information disqualifies them for admittance
to the United States.
Prior to entry to the United States, applicants are subject
to screening from the U.S. Customs and Border Protection
National Targeting Center Passenger and the Transportation
Security Administration's Secure Flight program.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Holding). All time for debate has
expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 531, the previous question is ordered on
the bill.
The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
Motion to Recommit
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit
at the desk.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. I am opposed.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to
recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mr. Thompson of Mississippi moves to recommit the bill H.R.
4038 to the Committee on Judiciary with instructions to
report the same back to the House forthwith with the
following amendment:
Strike all that follows after the enacting clause and
insert the following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Secure Refugee Process Act
of 2015''.
SEC. 2. SUPPLEMENTAL LIMITATIONS ON ADMISSION OF REFUGEES.
(a) Identity Verification Required.--No refugee applicant
of special interest shall be admitted as a refugee, until the
refugee applicant of special interest has satisfactorily
established his or her identity pursuant to procedures
established by the Secretary of Homeland Security, which
shall address any insufficient, conflicting, or unreliable
information, including biographic and biometric data that has
not been resolved at the time of admission.
(b) Comprehensive Review of Refugees To Identify Security
Threats to the United States.--No refugee applicant of
special interest shall be admitted as a refugee, if, by the
time of admission, the identity of the refugee applicant of
special interest's identity has not been checked against all
relevant records or databases maintained by the Secretary of
Homeland Security, the Attorney General (including the
Federal Bureau of Investigation), the Secretary of State, the
Secretary of Defense, the Director of National Intelligence,
and other Federal records or databases that the Secretary of
Homeland Security considers necessary, to determine any
national security, criminal, or other grounds on which the
refugee applicant of special interest may be inadmissible to
the United States.
(c) Certification Required.--A refugee applicant of special
interest may only be admitted to the United States as a
refugee after the Secretary of Homeland Security certifies
that all provisions of this Act have been complied with and
that the refugee applicant of special interest has not been
firmly resettled in a safe third country as described in
section 208(b)(2)(A)(vi) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act.
(d) Monthly Report to Congress.--The Secretary of Homeland
Security shall submit to the appropriate Congressional
Committees a monthly report on, for the month preceding the
date of the report, the total
[[Page H8398]]
number of refugee applicants of special interest and the
number of refugee applicants of special interest whose
applications were denied.
(e) Inspector General Review.--The Inspector General of the
Department of Homeland Security shall conduct an annual risk-
based review of a statistically valid sampling of
certifications and provide an annual report detailing its
findings to the appropriate Congressional Committees.
(f) Definition.--In this Act:
(1) The term ``appropriate Congressional Committees''
means--
(A) the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate;
(B) the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate;
(C) the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate;
(D) the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs of the Senate;
(E) the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate;
(F) the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate;
(G) the Committee on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives;
(H) the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the
House of Representatives;
(I) the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of
Representatives;
(J) the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of
Representatives;
(K) the Committee on Appropriations of the House of
Representatives; and
(L) the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of
Representatives.
(2) The term ``refugee applicant of special interest''
means any alien applying for admission to the United States
as a refugee who--
(A) is a national or resident of Iraq or Syria;
(B) has no nationality and whose last habitual residence
was in Iraq or Syria; or
(C) has been present in Iraq or Syria at any time on or
after March 1, 2011.
Mr. GOWDY (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I reserve a point of
order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. A point of order is reserved.
The Clerk will continue to read.
The Clerk continued to read.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent to dispense with the reading.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Mississippi?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Mississippi is recognized for 5 minutes in support of his motion.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, this is the final amendment
to the bill, which will not kill the bill or send it back to committee.
If adopted, the bill will immediately proceed to final passage, as
amended.
Mr. Speaker, my motion to recommit will do several things:
The first thing it will do is require the Secretary of Homeland
Security to verify the identity of refugee applicants. Any application
that contains insufficient, conflicting, or unreliable information
would be denied.
The second point of my motion to recommit is that this motion will
require at least five Federal agencies--the Department of Homeland
Security, the Attorney General and the Federal Bureau of Investigation,
the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the Director of
National Intelligence--all together to check refugee applicants against
their records. Any application that indicates a national security or
criminal threat would be denied.
In addition, Mr. Speaker, my motion would also require that the
Secretary of Homeland Security would certify that all relevant Federal
immigration laws have been complied with and that the applicant has not
been resettled in a safe third-party country, and has the Department of
Homeland Security inspector general's review as a sample of the
certifications.
Fourthly, Mr. Speaker, my motion to recommit would require the
Department of Homeland Security inspector general to submit monthly
reports to Congress on refugee applications from Syria and Iraq. The
Secure Refugee Process Act of 2015 is a pro-security, pro-compassion
bill that would ensure the U.S. continues to maintain the most
extensive interagency security screening process in the world to vet
all people who seek safe harbor in our great Nation.
Mr. Speaker, the people we are talking about in this particular
motion really don't have a country. Many of them have been tortured.
The women have been raped. The children, for lack of a better term, are
destitute.
{time} 1315
We are a Nation of values. My bill speaks to those values.
It does not pause the process. It does not create a moratorium on the
process. It adds an additional layer of security without stopping the
refugee program.
It is not an immigration bill. It is a refugee program. As I said
earlier, we had 23,000 individuals apply for status under this
particular program who were Iraqi or Syrian citizens. Of that number,
7,000 received interviews. Of that number, around 2,000 were approved.
So it takes time. My motion to recommit is a prudent approach to
recognizing the values of this country.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. GOWDY. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of a point of
order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The reservation of a point of order is
withdrawn.
Mr. GOWDY. I rise in opposition to the motion.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from South Carolina is
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. GOWDY. Mr. Speaker, national security and public safety are the
preeminent functions of government. National security and public safety
are not simply factors to be considered in the administration of some
broader policy objective. National security and public safety are the
ultimate policy objectives. And the safety and security of our fellow
citizens should be the driving force behind every decision that we
make.
This country, Mr. Speaker, has a long, proud, rich history of
welcoming those fleeing persecution and liberating those suffering
under oppression. We are the most welcoming, generous country in the
world, having taken in over 3 million refugees since 1975.
We are generous and compassionate, Mr. Speaker, because we are free.
And we are free because we are a country rooted in the law and public
safety and standards of decency protected by a fundamental commitment
to national security.
The world we currently find ourselves in, Mr. Speaker, is imperfect--
and becoming more imperfect. So, rather than address the underlying
pathology that results in displaced people, this administration is
focused on the symptoms.
There are refugees from the Middle East and northern Africa because
those regions are on fire and riddled with chaos. Our bright lines and
policies of containment, smart power, or whatever we call it today,
have failed.
Mr. Speaker, terrorists took the lives of over 100 innocent people in
France and injured many more because they could. They killed a hundred
only because they could not kill a thousand. Their objective is evil
for the sake of evil, murder for the sake of murder; wanton and willful
violence and premeditated depravity calculated to take innocent lives.
The terrorists have been very open about their present and future
objectives. We should, therefore, be equally clear about our
objectives.
Administration officials responsible for national security and public
safety, Mr. Speaker, have repeatedly warned us they cannot vet failed
nation-states. They cannot do background investigations where there is
no database.
ISIS will use any means available to harm us. What this
administration needs to tell the American people, Mr. Speaker, is how
much risk is acceptable. Given the consequences of reconciling the risk
wrongly, how much risk is this administration willing to take?
When it comes to public safety, we have to be successful all of the
time. And those who seek to do us harm have to be successful just once.
So how much risk are you willing to take with your own safety? How much
risk are you willing to take with the safety of those you swore an oath
to represent? Have you done everything in your power to mitigate that
risk? Have you done everything in your power to explore alternatives
other than resettlement here?
Mr. Speaker, every decision we make as elected officials should be
with the safety and security of our fellow citizens as the preeminent
objective. Unless and until those in charge of security and public
safety can provide assurances, the aid we render to those in
[[Page H8399]]
need should be rendered where they are.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, let me say this. The President is the
Commander in Chief. He should help us make this, our home, safer. He
should help us make the homeland of the refugees safer. He should
restore order to the region. That would be the very best and most
humane thing we could all do: provide a better, safer life for those
who aspire for one where they are.
Mr. Speaker, I oppose the motion to recommit and support the
underlying bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is
ordered on the motion to recommit.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas
and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule
XX, this 15-minute vote on the motion to recommit will be followed by
5-minute votes on passage of the bill, if ordered, and agreeing to the
Speaker's approval of the Journal, if ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 180,
nays 244, not voting 9, as follows:
[Roll No. 642]
YEAS--180
Adams
Aguilar
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Bustos
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chu, Judy
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
DeSaulnier
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle, Michael F.
Duckworth
Edwards
Engel
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fattah
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Graham
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hastings
Heck (WA)
Higgins
Himes
Honda
Hoyer
Huffman
Israel
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
Kirkpatrick
Kuster
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Lee
Levin
Lewis
Lieu, Ted
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Matsui
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Moore
Moulton
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nolan
Norcross
O'Rourke
Pallone
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree
Pocan
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Rice (NY)
Richmond
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Sherman
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Speier
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tonko
Torres
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters, Maxine
Welch
Yarmuth
NAYS--244
Abraham
Aderholt
Allen
Amash
Amodei
Ashford
Babin
Barletta
Barr
Barton
Benishek
Bilirakis
Bishop (MI)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Blum
Bost
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brat
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Burgess
Byrne
Calvert
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Clawson (FL)
Coffman
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Comstock
Conaway
Cook
Costello (PA)
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Curbelo (FL)
Davis, Rodney
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Donovan
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers (NC)
Emmer (MN)
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Garrett
Gibbs
Gibson
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Griffith
Grothman
Guinta
Guthrie
Hanna
Hardy
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Hice, Jody B.
Hill
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurd (TX)
Hurt (VA)
Issa
Jenkins (KS)
Jenkins (WV)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jolly
Jones
Jordan
Joyce
Katko
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Knight
Labrador
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Latta
LoBiondo
Long
Loudermilk
Love
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
MacArthur
Marchant
Marino
Massie
McCarthy
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McSally
Meadows
Meehan
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Moolenaar
Mooney (WV)
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Newhouse
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Olson
Palazzo
Palmer
Paulsen
Pearce
Perry
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Poliquin
Pompeo
Posey
Price, Tom
Ratcliffe
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney (FL)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Rouzer
Royce
Russell
Salmon
Sanford
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Stefanik
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Trott
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walker
Walorski
Walters, Mimi
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (IA)
Young (IN)
Zeldin
Zinke
NOT VOTING--9
DeFazio
Ellison
Hinojosa
Ruppersberger
Takai
Watson Coleman
Westmoreland
Williams
Wilson (FL)
{time} 1345
Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia changed his vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
Ms. EDWARDS, Mr. BUTTERFIELD, Ms. GABBARD, Messrs. CROWLEY, HONDA,
and LARSEN of Washington changed their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So the motion to recommit was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Graves of Louisiana). The question is on
the passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 289,
noes 137, not voting 8, as follows:
[Roll No. 643]
AYES--289
Abraham
Aderholt
Aguilar
Allen
Amash
Amodei
Ashford
Babin
Barletta
Barr
Barton
Benishek
Bera
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (MI)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Blum
Bost
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brat
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Brownley (CA)
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Burgess
Bustos
Byrne
Calvert
Carney
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Clawson (FL)
Coffman
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Comstock
Conaway
Connolly
Cook
Cooper
Costa
Costello (PA)
Courtney
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Cuellar
Culberson
Curbelo (FL)
Davis, Rodney
Delaney
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Doggett
Dold
Donovan
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers (NC)
Emmer (MN)
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gabbard
Garamendi
Garrett
Gibbs
Gibson
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graham
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green, Gene
Griffith
Grothman
Guinta
Guthrie
Hahn
Hanna
Hardy
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Hice, Jody B.
Hill
Himes
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurd (TX)
Hurt (VA)
Israel
Issa
Jenkins (KS)
Jenkins (WV)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jolly
Jordan
Joyce
Kaptur
Katko
Keating
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Kind
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Knight
Kuster
Labrador
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Langevin
Latta
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Long
Loudermilk
[[Page H8400]]
Love
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lynch
MacArthur
Maloney, Sean
Marchant
Marino
Massie
McCarthy
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McSally
Meadows
Meehan
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Moolenaar
Mooney (WV)
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Newhouse
Noem
Nolan
Norcross
Nugent
Nunes
Olson
Palazzo
Palmer
Paulsen
Pearce
Perry
Peters
Peterson
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Poliquin
Polis
Pompeo
Posey
Price, Tom
Ratcliffe
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (NY)
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney (FL)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Rouzer
Royce
Ruiz
Russell
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sanford
Scalise
Schrader
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Sewell (AL)
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Slaughter
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Stefanik
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Trott
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Veasey
Vela
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walker
Walorski
Walters, Mimi
Walz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (IA)
Young (IN)
Zeldin
Zinke
NOES--137
Adams
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Beyer
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardenas
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chu, Judy
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Conyers
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
DeSaulnier
Deutch
Dingell
Doyle, Michael F.
Duckworth
Edwards
Engel
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fattah
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Gallego
Grayson
Green, Al
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hastings
Heck (WA)
Higgins
Honda
Hoyer
Huffman
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
King (IA)
Kirkpatrick
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Lee
Levin
Lewis
Lieu, Ted
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Maloney, Carolyn
Matsui
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Moore
Moulton
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
O'Rourke
Pallone
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Pingree
Pocan
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Richmond
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sherman
Sires
Smith (WA)
Speier
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tonko
Torres
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Vargas
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wasserman Schultz
Waters, Maxine
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--8
DeFazio
Ellison
Hinojosa
Ruppersberger
Takai
Watson Coleman
Westmoreland
Williams
{time} 1355
Mr. RUSSELL changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
PERSONAL EXPLANATION
Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I was, unfortunately, unable to vote
today due to a personal matter. Had I been present I would have voted
the following ways: rollcall 641--H.R. 3189, the FORM Act of 2015--
``nay;'' rollcall 643--H.R. 4038, the American SAFE Act of 2015--
``nay.''
personal explanation
Mr. TAKAI. Mr. Speaker, on Thursday, November 19, I was absent from
the House due to illness. Due to my absence, I am not recorded on any
legislative measures for the day. I would like to reflect how I would
have voted had I been present for legislative business.
Had I been present, I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall 638, the
Motion on Ordering the Previous Question on the American SAFE Act of
2015.
I would have voted ``yes'' on rollcall 639, providing for
consideration of the American SAFE Act of 2015.
I would have voted ``yes'' on rollcall 640, the Democratic Motion to
Recommit the FORM Act of 2015.
I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall 641, the FORM Act of 2015.
I would have voted ``yes'' on rollcall 642, the Democratic Motion to
Recommit the American SAFE Act of 2015.
I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall 643, the American SAFE Act of
2015.
Personal Explanation
Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Mr. Speaker, I was not able to vote today for
medical reasons.
Had I been present on rollcall vote 638, I would have voted ``no.''
Had I been present on rollcall vote 639, I would have voted ``no.''
Had I been present on rollcall vote 640, I would have voted ``yes.''
Had I been present on rollcall vote 641, I would have voted ``no.''
Had I been present on rollcall vote 642, I would have voted ``yes.''
Had I been present on rollcall vote 643, I would have voted ``no.''
____________________