[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 39 (Tuesday, March 7, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1641-S1646]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. REED (for himself, Ms. Collins, and Mr. Warner):
S. 536. A bill to promote transparency in the oversight of
cybersecurity risks at publicly traded companies; to the Committee on
Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Mr. REED. Mr. President, today I am reintroducing the Cybersecurity
Disclosure Act of 2017 along with two members of the Select Committee
on Intelligence, Senator Collins, and the ranking member, Senator
Warner. In response to data breaches of various companies that exposed
the personal information of millions of customers, our legislation asks
each publicly traded company to include--in Securities and Exchange
Commission, SEC, disclosures to investors--information on whether any
member of the board of directors is a cybersecurity expert, and if why
having this expertise on the board of directors is not necessary
because of other cyber security steps taken by the publicly traded
company. To be clear, the legislation does not require companies to
take any actions other than to provide this disclosure to its
investors.
Many investors may be surprised to learn that board directors who
participated in the National Association of Corporate Directors, NACD,
roundtable discussions on cyber security late in 2013 admitted that
``the lack of adequate knowledge of information technology risk has
made it challenging for them to `effectively oversee management's
cybersecurity activities.' '' More recently, in Deloitte's 10th Global
Risk Management Survey of Financial Services Institutions, published
this month, 42 percent of respondents considered their institution to
be less effective in managing cybersecurity. And according to the 2016-
2017 NACD Public Company Governance Survey, ``fifty-nine percent of
respondents reported that they find it challenging to oversee cyber
risk, and only 19 percent of respondents said that their boards possess
a high level of knowledge about cybersecurity.'' Indeed, Yahoo in its
most recent annual report, which was filed with the SEC last week,
disclosed that ``the Independent Committee found that failures in
communication, management, inquiry and internal reporting contributed
to the lack of proper comprehension and handling of the 2014 Security
Incident. The Independent Committee also found that the Audit and
Finance Committee and the full board were not adequately informed of
the full severity, risks, and potential impacts of the 2014 Security
Incident and related matters.'' The 2014 Security Incident here refers
to the fact that ``a copy of certain user account information for
approximately 500 million user accounts was stolen from Yahoo's network
in late 2014.'' This is particularly troubling given that data breaches
are on the rise. Indeed, 2016 was a recordbreaking year for data
breaches, which increased 40 percent from the prior year to 1,093
breaches according to the Identity Theft Resource Center.
Investors and customers deserve a clear understanding of whether
publicly traded companies are prioritizing cyber security and have the
capacity to protect investors and customers from cyber-related attacks.
Our legislation aims to provide a better understanding of these issues
through improved SEC disclosure.
While this legislation is a matter for consideration by the Banking
Committee, of which I am a member, this bill is also informed by my
service on the Armed Services Committee and the Select Committee on
Intelligence. It is through this Banking-Armed Services-Intelligence
perspective that I see that our economic security is indeed a matter of
our national security, and this is particularly the case as our economy
becomes increasingly reliant on technology and the Internet.
For example, when he was Director of National Intelligence, James
Clapper, appeared before the Armed Services Committee in 2015 and
testified that ``cyber threats to the U.S. national and economic
security are increasing in frequency, scale, sophistication and
severity of impact.'' He further said that ``[b]ecause of our heavy
dependence on the Internet, nearly all information communication
technologies and I.T. networks and systems will be perpetually at
risk.''
Indeed, retired Army GEN Keith Alexander, who is the former commander
of the United States Cyber Command and former Director of the National
Security Agency, appeared before the Armed Services Committee this
month and stated that ``while the primary responsibility of government
is to defend the nation, the private sector also shares responsibility
in creating the partnership necessary to make the defense of our nation
possible. Neither the government nor the private sector can capably
protect their systems and networks without extensive and close
cooperation.''
With mounting cyber threats and concerns over the capabilities of
corporate directors, we all need to be more proactive in ensuring our
Nation's cyber security before there are additional serious breaches.
This legislation seeks to take one step toward that
[[Page S1642]]
goal by encouraging publicly traded companies to be more transparent to
their investors and customers on whether and how their boards of
directors are prioritizing cyber security.
I thank Harvard Law School professor John Coates, MIT professor Simon
Johnson, Columbia Law School professor John Coffee, and the Consumer
Federation of America for their support, and I urge my colleagues to
join Senator Collins, Senator Warner, and me in supporting this
legislation.
______
By Mr. LEAHY (for himself, Mr. Franken, Mr. Blumenthal, Mr.
Durbin, Mr. Whitehouse, Mr. Markey, Ms. Warren, Mrs. Murray,
Ms. Baldwin, Ms. Heitkamp, Ms. Hirono, Mr. Brown, Mr. Booker,
and Mrs. Shaheen):
S. 550. A bill to restore statutory rights to the people of the
United States from forced arbitration; to the Committee on the
Judiciary.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, today, I have reintroduced legislation to
protect Americans from being stripped of their legal rights by little
known clauses that are now hidden in an alarming number of contracts.
When we enter into agreements to obtain cell phone service, rent an
apartment, or accept a new job, most are not made aware of the forced
arbitration clauses that are tucked away in the legal fine print. But
these dangerous provision force us to abandon our constitutional right
to protect ourselves in court and instead send hard-working Americans
to face wealthy corporations behind closed doors in private
arbitration. This must change.
When Congress passed the Federal Arbitration Act in 1925, it was
intended to help businesses resolve legal disputes with each other. But
over the past two decades, private arbitration has been abused by large
companies to push Americans out of court. In doing so, these companies
have effectively opted out of critical labor, consumer, and civil
rights laws that give Americans the ability to assert their claims
before our independent judiciary.
Forced arbitration clauses now appear in nearly every contract we
sign. Unfortunately, examples of the injustice caused by these clauses
are equally ubiquitous and can be found all across the country. They
affect consumers, workers, seniors, veterans, and families in Vermont
and every other State, and the cases are heart-wrenching.
Just last week, the Washington Post reported that hundreds of current
and former employees of Sterling Jewelers--a company that earns $6
billion in annual revenue--have for years alleged that the company is
engaged in pervasive gender discrimination and has fostered a culture
that condones sexual harassment. The stories now being reported are
shocking and date back to the early 1990s. Yet, despite the fact that
women at the company have been alleging misconduct for decades, no one
knew about it. That is because their claims were hidden behind closed
doors because of private arbitration. To this day, we still do not know
the full details.
The press has helped to bring attention to other instances of forced
arbitration in recent years. In 2015, the Los Angeles Times revealed
that Wells Fargo used arbitration clauses to deny customers whose names
were used to open fraudulent accounts an opportunity to seek justice in
court. In fact, Wells Fargo asked a Federal court in Utah to move a
number of sham account allegations to arbitration. The New York Times
dedicated a three-part investigative series to highlighting the impact
on consumers and workers of forced arbitration clauses. And becoming
the story herself, television journalist Gretchen Carlson was barred
from speaking publicly about her allegations of sexual harassment
against former FOX News chairman Roger Ailes.
I have long raised concerns about the practice of forced arbitration,
and as chairman led hearings of the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2007,
2008, 2011, and 2013. This should not be a partisan issue. Both
Republican and Democratic attorneys general have repeatedly spoken out
against the Federal Arbitration Act's intrusion on State sovereignty
and a State's compelling interest in protecting the health and welfare
of its citizens. In Vermont, lawmakers enacted commonsense legislation
to limit the abuse of forced arbitration clauses and raise consumer
awareness, but but this law was invalidated because it conflicted with
Federal law. Companies have effectively created a ``get out of jail
free'' card that guts our laws and shields bad actors from any type of
public accountability. This is an unconscionable situation, and
Congress must act.
The Restoring Statutory Rights Act that I am reintroducing today/will
protect Americans' right to seek justice in our courts. It will ensure
that our Federal laws will actually be effective by ensuring that
Americans cannot be stripped of their ability to enforce their rights
before our independent court system. This bill also ensures that when
States act to address forced arbitration, as my home State of Vermont
has, they are not preempted by an overbroad reading of our Federal
arbitration laws.
This effort is supported by the Leadership Conference for Civil and
Human Rights, the National Employment Lawyers' Association, and
consumer groups such as National Association of Consumer Advocates,
Consumers Union, Public Citizen, the National Consumer Law Center, and
Consumers for Auto Reliability and Safety. For years, these groups and
many others have worked tirelessly to highlight the injustice of forced
arbitration and the full scope of the number of people it affects.
All Senators should care about ensuring that corporations cannot
unilaterally circumvent the statutes that this body writes, debates,
and enacts into law. Senators should also care about the ability of the
States to protect consumers from unconscionable contracts. I urge
Members to support this bill.
______
By Mr. DURBIN (for himself, Mr. Franken, Mr. Whitehouse, Ms.
Warren, Mr. Reed, Mr. Brown, Mr. Blumenthal, and Ms. Hirono):
S. 553. A bill to provide that chapter 1 of title 9 of the United
States Code, relating to the enforcement of arbitration agreements,
shall not apply to enrollment agreements made between students and
certain institutions of higher education, and to prohibit limitations
on the ability of students to pursue claims against certain
institutions of higher education; to the Committee on Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 553
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 ``Court Legal Access and
Student Support (CLASS) Act of 2017''.
SEC. 2. INAPPLICABILITY OF CHAPTER 1 OF TITLE 9, UNITED
STATES CODE, TO ENROLLMENT AGREEMENTS MADE
BETWEEN STUDENTS AND CERTAIN INSTITUTIONS OF
HIGHER EDUCATION.
(a) In General.--Chapter 1 of title 9 of the United States
Code (relating to the enforcement of arbitration agreements)
shall not apply to an enrollment agreement made between a
student and an institution of higher education.
(b) Definition.--In this section, the term ``institution of
higher education'' has the meaning given such term in section
102 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1002).
SEC. 3. PROHIBITION ON LIMITATIONS ON ABILITY OF STUDENTS TO
PURSUE CLAIMS AGAINST CERTAIN INSTITUTIONS OF
HIGHER EDUCATION.
Section 487(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20
U.S.C. 1094(a)) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(30) The institution will not require any student to
agree to, and will not enforce, any limitation or restriction
(including a limitation or restriction on any available
choice of applicable law, a jury trial, or venue) on the
ability of a student to pursue a claim, individually or with
others, against an institution in court.''.
SEC. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Act and the amendments made by this Act shall take
effect 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act.
______
By Mrs. FEINSTEIN:
S. 555. A bill for the relief of Shirley Constantino Tan; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, today I am reintroducing a bill for
the private relief of Shirley Constantino Tan. Ms. Tan is a Filipina
national living in Pacifica, CA. She is the proud
[[Page S1643]]
mother of 20-year-old U.S. citizen twin boys, Joriene and Jashley, and
the spouse of Jay Mercado, a naturalized U.S. citizen.
I believe Ms. Tan merits Congress's special consideration for this
extraordinary form of relief because her removal from the United States
would cause undue hardship for her and her family. She faces
deportation to the Philippines, which would separate her from her
family and jeopardize her safety.
Ms. Tan experienced horrific violence in the Philippines before she
left to come to the United States. When she was only 14 years old, her
cousin murdered her mother and her sister and shot Shirley in the head.
While the cousin who committed the murders was eventually prosecuted,
he received a short jail sentence. Fearing for her safety, Ms. Tan fled
the Philippines just before her cousin was due to be released from
jail. She entered the United States legally on a visitor's visa in
1989.
Ms. Tan's current deportation order is the result of negligent
counsel. She applied for asylum in 1995. While her case appeal was
pending at the Board of Immigration Appeals, her attorney failed to
submit a brief to support her case. As a result, the case was
dismissed, and the Board of Immigration Appeals granted Shirley
voluntary departure from the United States.
Ms. Tan never received notice that the Board of Immigration Appeals
granted her voluntary departure. Her attorney moved offices, did not
receive the order, and ultimately never informed her of the order. As a
result, Ms. Tan did not depart the United States and the grant of
voluntary departure automatically led to a removal order. She learned
about the deportation order for the first time on January 28, 2009,
when Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents took her into
immigration custody.
Because of her attorney's negligent actions, Ms. Tan was denied the
opportunity to present her case in immigration proceedings. She later
filed a complaint with the State Bar of California against her former
attorney. She is not the first person to file such a complaint against
this attorney.
On February 4, 2015, Ms. Tan's spouse, Jay, a U.S. citizen, filed an
approved spousal petition on her behalf. On August 20, 2015, U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services denied her application due to the
fact that she still had a final order of removal. Ms. Tan must go back
to the immigration court and ask for the court to terminate her case
and then reapply for her green card. Ms. Tan is now again facing the
threat of deportation while she seeks to close her case before an
immigration court.
In addition to the hardship that Ms. Tan would endure if she is
deported, her deportation would cause serious hardship to her two U.S.
citizen children, Joriene and Jashley.
Joriene is a junior at Stanford University and is premed, majoring in
human biology. In addition to his studies, Joriene is involved in
Stanford's Pilipino-American Student Union.
Jashley is a junior at Chapman University, majoring in business
administration. Ms. Tan no longer runs her in-home daycare and is a
homemaker.
If Ms. Tan were forced to leave the United States, her family has
expressed that they would go with her to the Philippines or try to find
a third country where the entire family could relocate. This would mean
that Joriene and Jashley would have to leave behind their education and
the only home they know in the United States.
I do not believe it is in our Nation's best interest to force this
family, with two U.S. citizen children, to make the choice between
being separated and relocating to a country where they may face safety
concerns or other serious hardships.
Ms. Tan and her family are involved in their community in Pacifica
and own their own home. The family attends Good Shepherd Catholic
Church, volunteering at the church and the Mother Teresa of Calcutta's
Daughters of Charity. Ms. Tan has the support of dozens of members of
her community who have shared with me the family's spirit of commitment
to their community.
Enactment of the legislation I am introducing on behalf of Ms. Tan
today will enable this entire family to continue their lives in
California and make positive contributions to their community.
Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to support this private bill.
______
By Mrs. FEINSTEIN:
S. 556. A bill for the relief of Joseph Gabra and Sharon Kamel; to
the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, today I am reintroducing private
relief legislation on behalf of Joseph Gabra and Sharon Kamel, a couple
living with their four U.S. citizen children in Camarillo, CA.
Joseph and Sharon are nationals of Egypt who fled their home country
over 19 years ago after being targeted for their religious membership
in the Christian Coptic Church in Egypt. They became involved with this
church during the 1990s, Joseph as an accountant and project
coordinator helping to build community facilities and Sharon as the
church's training director in human resources.
Unfortunately, Joseph and Sharon were also subjected to threats and
abuse. Joseph was jailed repeatedly because of his involvement with the
church. Sharon's family members were violently targeted, including her
cousin who was murdered and her brother whose business was firebombed.
When Sharon became pregnant with her first child, she was threatened by
a member of a different religious organization for raising her child in
a non-Muslim faith.
Joseph and Sharon came to the United States legally on visitor visas
in November 1998. Due to their fears of persecution in Egypt based on
their religious beliefs, they filed for asylum in the United States in
May 1999.
However, Joseph, who has a speech impediment, had difficulty
communicating why he was afraid to return to Egypt, and 1 year later
their asylum application was denied. Considering that Sharon's brother,
who also applied for asylum for similar reasons, was granted asylum in
the United States, Joseph and Sharon appealed the denial of their
asylum applications, to no avail.
While Sharon's brother, who is now a U.S. citizen, has filed a
family-based immigrant petition on Sharon's behalf, it will be at least
4 years until she will even be eligible for a visa number due to visa
backlogs.
If Sharon and Joseph are deported before then, they will not only be
separated from their family but will be forced to return to a country
where persecution of Coptic Christians continues.
Due to their fear of returning to Egypt, Joseph and Sharon have
therefore tried to build a life for themselves here in the United
States, working hard while building their beautiful family. With the
protection of past private bills I filed on their behalf, Joseph was
able to get his certified public accountant license and opened his own
accounting firm, where Sharon works by his side.
Joseph and Sharon make sure that their four U.S. citizen children--
Jessica, age 18, Rebecca, age 17, Rafael, age 16, and Veronica, age
11--all attend school in California and maintain good grades.
Joseph and Sharon carry strong support from friends, members of their
local church, and other Californians who attest to their good character
and community contributions.
I am concerned that the entire family would face serious and
unwarranted hardships if Joseph and Sharon were forced to return to
Egypt. For Jessica, Rebecca, Rafael, and Veronica, the only home they
know is in the United States. Separation of this family would be
devastating and the alternative--relocating the family to Egypt--could
be dire, as it is quite possible that these four American children
would face discrimination or worse on account of their religion, as was
the experience of many of their family members.
Joseph and Sharon have made a compelling plea to remain in the United
States. These parents emphasize their commitment to supporting their
children and creating a healthy and productive place for them to grow
up in California. I believe this family deserves that opportunity.
I respectfully ask my colleagues to support this private relief bill
on behalf of Joseph Gabra and Sharon Kamel.
______
By Mrs. FEINSTEIN:
S. 557. A bill for the relief of Jose Alberto Martinez Moreno,
Micaela
[[Page S1644]]
Lopez Martinez, and Adilene Martinez; to the Committee on the
Judiciary.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, today I am reintroducing private
immigration relief legislation to provide lawful permanent resident
status to Jose Alberto Martinez Moreno, Micaela Lopez Martinez, and
their daughter, Adilene Martinez. This family is originally from Mexico
but has been living in California for over 20 years. I believe they
merit Congress's special consideration for this extraordinary form of
relief.
When Jose came to the United States from Mexico, he began working as
a busboy in restaurants in San Francisco, CA. In 1990, he started
working as a cook at Palio D'Asti, an award-winning Italian restaurant
in San Francisco.
Jose worked his way through the ranks, eventuall becoming Palio's
sous chef. His colleagues describe him as a reliable and cool-headed
coworker and as ``an exemplary employee'' who not only is ``good at his
job but is also a great boss to his subordinates.''
He and his wife Micaela call San Francisco home. Micaela is a
homemaker and part-time housekeeper. They have three daughters, two of
whom are U.S. citizens. Their oldest daughter, Adilene, age 28, is
undocumented. She currently works fulltime at a cinema and hopes to
continue pursuing her studies in the future.
The Martinez's second daughter, Jazmin, age 24, is a U.S. citizen.
She graduated from Leadership High School and is now studying at
California State University, San Francisco. Jazmin has been diagnosed
with asthma, which requires constant treatment. According to her
doctor, if Jazmin were to return to Mexico with her family, the high
altitude and air pollution in Mexico City could be fatal to her. The
Martinez's other U.S. citizen daughter, Karla, is 19 years old and
attends San Francisco City College.
The Martinez family attempted to legalize their status through
several channels.
In 2001, Jose's sister, who has legal status, petitioned for Jose to
get a green card. However, the current green card backlog for siblings
from Mexico is very long, and it will be many years before Jose will be
eligible to legalize his status though his sister.
In 2002, the Martinez family applied for political asylum. Their
application was denied. An immigration judge denied their subsequent
application for cancellation of removal.
Finally, Daniel Scherotter, the executive chef and owner of Palio
D'Asti, petitioned for an employment-based green card for Jose based
upon his unique skills as a chef. Jose's petition was approved by U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services. However, before he will be
eligible for a green card, he must apply for a hardship waiver, which
cannot be guaranteed.
The Martinez family has become an integral part of their community in
California. They are active in their faith community. They volunteer
with community-based organizations and are, in turn, supported by their
community. When I first introduced this bill, I received dozens of
letters of support from their fellow parishioners, teachers, and
members of their community.
The Martinez family truly exemplifies the American dream. Jose worked
his way through the restaurant industry to become a chef and an
indispensable employee at a renowned restaurant. With great dedication,
Micaela has worked hard to raise three daughters who are advancing
their education and look forward to continuing the pursuit of their
goals.
I believe the Martinez family's continued presence in the United
States would allow them to continue making significant contributions to
their community in California.
I ask my colleagues to support this private bill.
______
By Mrs. FEINSTEIN:
S. 558. A bill for the relief of Esidronio Arreola-Saucedo, Maria
Elena Cobian Arreola, Nayely Arreola Carlos, and Cindy Jael Arreola; to
the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, today I offer private immigration
relief legislation to provide lawful permanent resident status to
Esidronio Arreola-Saucedo, Maria Elena Cobian Arreola, Nayely Arreola
Carlos, and Cindy Jael Arreola. The Arreolas are Mexican nationals
living in the Fresno area of California.
Esidronio and Maria Elena have lived in the United States for over 20
years. Two of their five children--Nayely, age 30, and Cindy, age 28--
also stand to benefit from this legislation. The other three Arreola
children--Robert, age 25, Daniel, age 22, and Saray, age 20--are U.S.
citizens. The story of the Arreola family is compelling, and I believe
they merit Congress's special consideration for such an extraordinary
form of relief as a private bill.
The Arreolas are facing deportation in part because of grievous
errors committed by their previous counsel, who has since been
disbarred. In fact, the attorney's conduct was so egregious that it
compelled an immigration judge to write to the Executive Office of
Immigration Review seeking the attorney's disbarment for his actions in
his clients' immigration cases.
Esidronio came to the United States in 1986 and was an agricultural
migrant worker in the fields of California for several years. As a
migrant worker at that time, he would have been eligible for permanent
residence through the Seasonal Agricultural Workers, SWA, Program, had
he known about it.
Maria Elena was living in the United States at the time she became
pregnant with her daughter Cindy. She returned to Mexico to give birth
because she wanted to avoid any immigration issues.
Because of the length of time that the Arreolas were in the United
States, it is likely that they would have qualified for suspension of
deportation, which would have allowed them to remain in the United
States legally. However, the poor legal representation they received
foreclosed this opportunity.
One of the most compelling reasons for my introduction of this
private bill is the devastating impact the deportation of Esidronio and
Maria Elena would have on their children--three of whom are American
citizens--and the other two who have lived in the United States since
they were toddlers. America is the only country the Arreola children
have ever known.
Nayely, the oldest, was the first in her family to graduate from high
school and the first to graduate college. She recently received her
Masters in Business Administration from Fresno Pacific University, a
regionally ranked university, and now works in the admissions office.
Nayely is married and has a young son named Elijah Ace Carlos.
At a young age, Nayely demonstrated a strong commitment to the ideals
of citizenship in her adopted country. She worked hard to achieve her
full potential both through her academic endeavors and community
service. As the Associate Dean of Enrollment Services at Fresno Pacific
University states in a letter of support, ``[T]he leaders of Fresno
Pacific University saw in Nayely, a young person who will become
exemplary of all that is good in the American dream.''
In high school, Nayely was a member of the Advancement Via Individual
Determination (AVID) college preparatory program in which students
commit to determining their own futures through attaining a college
degree. Nayely was also President of the Key Club, a community service
organization. Perhaps the greatest hardship to Nayely's U.S. citizen
husband and child, if she were forced to return to Mexico, would be her
lost opportunity to realize her dreams and contribute further to her
community and to this country.
Nayely's sister, Cindy, is also married and has a 7-year-old daughter
and a 5-year-old son. Neither Nayely nor Cindy is eligible to
automatically adjust their status based on their marriages because of
their initial unlawful entry.
The Arreolas also have other family who are U.S. citizens or lawful
permanent residents of this country. Maria Elena has three brothers who
are American citizens, and Esidronio has a sister who is an American
citizen. They have no immediate family in Mexico.
According to immigration authorities, this family has never had any
problems with law enforcement. I am told that they have filed their
taxes every year from 1990 to the present. They have always worked hard
to support themselves.
[[Page S1645]]
As I mentioned, Esidronio was previously employed as a farm worker
but now has his own business in California repairing electronics. His
business has been successful enough to enable him to purchase a home
for his family. He and his wife are active in their church community
and in their children's education.
It is clear to me that this family has embraced the American dream.
Enactment of the legislation I have reintroduced today will enable the
Arreolas to continue to make significant contributions to their
community as well as the United States.
I ask my colleagues to support this private bill.
______
By Mrs. FEINSTEIN:
S. 559. A bill for the relief of Alfredo Plascencia Lopez; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to offer legislation to
provide lawful permanent residence status to Alfredo Plascencia Lopez,
a Mexican national who lives in the San Bruno area of California.
I offer legislation on his behalf because I believe that, without it,
this hard-working man, wife who is a lawful permanent resident, and
children would face extreme hardship. His children would either face
separation from their father or be forced to leave the only country
they know and give up the education they are pursuing in the United
States.
Alfredo and his wife Maria have been in the United States for over 20
years. They worked for years to adjust their status through appropriate
legal channels, but poor legal representation ruined their
opportunities.
The Plascencias' lawyer refused to return their calls or otherwise
communicate with them in any way. He also failed to forward crucial
immigration documents. Because of the poor representation they
received, Alfredo only became aware that they had been ordered to leave
the United States 15 days prior to his scheduled deportation.
Alfredo was shocked to learn of his attorney's malfeasance, but he
acted quickly to secure legitimate counsel and filed the appropriate
paperwork to delay his deportation and determine if any other legal
action could be taken.
Together, Alfredo and Maria have used their professional successes,
with the assistance of private bills, to realize many of the goals
dreamed of by all Americans. They have worked hard and saved up to buy
their home.
They have good health care benefits, and they each have begun saving
for retirement. They are sending their children Christina, Erika, and
Danny, to college and plan to send the rest of their children to
college, as well.
Their oldest child, Christina, is 26 years old, and takes classes at
Heald College to become a paralegal. Erika, age 22, graduated from high
school and is currently taking classes at Skyline College. Her teachers
have praised her abilities and have referred to her as a ``bright
spot'' in the classroom. Danny, age 20, currently attends the
University of California and volunteers at his local homeless shelter
in the soup kitchen. Daisy, age 15, and Juan Pablo, age 10, are in
school and plan on attending college.
Allowing Alfredo to remain in the United States is necessary to
enable his family to continue thriving in the United States. His
children are dedicated to pursuing their education and being productive
members of their community.
I do not believe that Alfredo should be separated from his family. I
am reintroducing this legislation to protect the best interest of
Alfredo's U.S. citizen children and his wife, who is a lawful permanent
resident. I believe that Alfredo will continue to make positive
contributions to his community in California and this country. I
respectfully ask my colleagues to support this bill.
______
By Mrs. FEINSTEIN:
S. 560. A bill for the relief of Jorge Rojas Gutierrez and Oliva
Gonzalez; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, today I am reintroducing a private
relief bill on behalf of Jorge Rojas Gutierrez and his wife, Oliva
Gonzalez. The Rojas family, originally from Mexico, is living in the
San Jose area of California.
The story of the Rojas family is compelling, and I believe they merit
Congress's special consideration for such an extraordinary form of
relief as a private bill.
Jorge and Oliva originally came to the United States in 1990 when
their son Jorge Rojas, Jr., was just 2 years old. In 1995, they left
the country to attend a funeral and then reentered the United States on
visitors' visas.
The family has grown to include three U.S. citizen children: Alexis,
now 24 years old, Tanya, 22 years old, and Matias, now 7 years old.
Jorge and Oliva are also the grandparents of Meena Rojas.
The Rojas family first attempted to legalize their status in the
United States when an unscrupulous immigration consultant, who was not
an attorney, advised them to apply for asylum. Unfortunately, without
proper legal guidance, the family did not realize at the time that they
lacked a valid basis for asylum. Their asylum claim was denied in 2008,
leaving the Rojas family with no further options to legalize their
status.
Since their arrival in the United States more than 20 years ago, the
Rojas family has demonstrated a robust work ethic and a strong
commitment to their community in California. They have paid their taxes
and worked hard to contribute to this country.
Jorge is a hard-working individual who has been employed by
BrightView Landscaping Services, formerly known as Valley Crest
Landscape Maintenance, in San Jose, CA, for the past 20 years.
Currently, he works on commercial landscaping projects. Jorge is well-
respected by his supervisor and his peers.
In addition to supporting his family, Jorge has volunteered his time
to provide modern green landscaping and building projects at his
children's school in California. He is active in his neighborhood
association, through which he worked with his neighbors to open a
library and community center in their community.
Oliva, in addition to raising her three children, has also been very
active in the local community. She volunteers with the People Acting in
Community Together, PACT, organization, where she works to prevent
crime, gangs, and drug dealing in San Jose neighborhoods and schools.
Jorge Rojas, Jr., who entered the United States as an infant with his
parents, is now the father of 6-year-old Meena. He is 28 years old and
working at a job that allows him to support his daughter. Jorge
graduated from Del Mar High School in 2007. He has obtained temporary
protection from deportation through the 2012 Deferred Action for
Childhood Arrivals, DACA, Program.
Alexis, age 24, graduated from West Valley College in Saratoga, CA,
and is interested in continuing his linguistics studies at San Jose
State University. Tanya, age 22, is now in her second semester at San
Jose State University. Their teachers have described them as
``fantastic, wonderful and gifted'' students.
Perhaps one of the most compelling reasons for permitting the Rojas
family to remain in the United States is the impact that their
deportation would have on their four children. Three of the Rojas
children--Alexis, Tanya, and Matias--American citizens. Additionally,
Jorge Rojas, Jr., has lived in the United States since he was a
toddler. America is the only country these children have called home.
It seems so clear to me that this family has embraced the American
dream, and their continued presence in our country would do so much to
promote the values we hold dear,
When I first introduced this bill, I received dozens of letters from
the community in Northern California in support of this family.
Enactment of the legislation I have reintroduced today will keep this
great family together and enable each of them to continue making
significant contributions to their community as well as the United
States.
I ask my colleagues to support this private bill.
______
By Mrs. FEINSTEIN:
S. 561. A bill for the relief of Alicia Aranda De Buendia; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I am reintroducing a private relief
bill
[[Page S1646]]
on behalf of Alicia Buendia, a woman who has lived in the Fresno area
of California for more than 20 years. I believe her situation merits
Congress's special consideration.
She is married to Jose Buendia, and together they have raised two
outstanding children, Ana Laura, age 28, and Alex, age 26, a U.S.
citizen. Both children have excelled in school. Ana Laura graduated
from University of California, Irvine, and Alex is currently attending
the University of California, Merced.
I previously introduced bills for Alicia, her husband, and Ana Laura.
Thankfully, Jose has successfully secured lawful permanent residency
for himself through cancellation of removal. This followed 7
unfortunate years of delay in the immigration courts to determine his
eligibility under the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 for
permanent residence. Ana Laura has obtained temporary protection from
deportation through the 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals,
DACA, Program.
However, Alicia, who is eligible to adjust status, is still awaiting
a determination on a family-based immigration petition filed by her
U.S. citizen son. Additionally, she would be required to file a waiver
application, which could result in separation from her family
Alicia warrants private relief and a chance to start fresh in
America. She goes to work season after season in California's labor-
intensive agriculture industry in Reedley, CA, where she currently
works for a fruit packing company.
In the more than 20 years of living in California, Alicia has
dedicated herself to her family and community. She and Jose have worked
hard to honestly feed their family and have raised two exceptional
children who have both pursued and excelled in higher education.
Alicia has a strong connection to her local community, serving as an
active member of her church. She and Jose pay their taxes every year,
have successfully paid off their mortgage, and remain free of debt.
They have shown that they are responsible, maintaining health
insurance, savings accounts, and retirement accounts. Without this
private bill, Alicia would be separated from her lawful permanent
resident husband, two children who rely on her for love, support, and
guidance.
I ask my colleagues to support this private bill.
______
By Mrs. FEINSTEIN:
S. 562. A bill for the relief of Ruben Mkoian, Asmik Karapetian, and
Arthur Mkoian; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I am reintroducing private relief
legislation in the 115th Congress on behalf of Ruben Mkoian, Asmik
Karapetian, and their son, Arthur Mkoian. The Mkoian family has been
living in Fresno, CA, for over 20 years. I continue to believe this
family deserves Congress's special consideration for such an
extraordinary form of relief as a private bill.
The Mkoian family is originally from Armenia. They decided to leave
Armenia for the United States in the early 1990s, following several
incidents in which the family experienced harassment, vandalism and
threats to their well-being.
In Armenia, Ruben worked as a police sergeant on vehicle licensing.
At one point, he was offered a bribe to register stolen vehicles, which
he refused and reported to his superior, the police chief. He later
learned that a coworker had registered the vehicles at the request of
the same chief.
After Ruben reported the bribe offer to illegally register vehicles
and said he would call the police, his family store was vandalized and
he received threatening phone calls telling him to keep quiet. A bottle
of gasoline was thrown into his family's residence, burning it to the
ground. In April 1992, several men entered the family store and
assaulted Ruben, hospitalizing him for 22 days.
Ruben, Asmik, and their son Arthur, who was 3 years old at the time,
left Armenia and entered the United States on visitor visas. They
applied for political asylum that same year on the grounds that they
would be subject to physical attacks if returned to Armenia. It took 16
years for their case to be finalized, with the Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals denying their asylum case in January 2008.
At this time, Ruben, Asmik, and Arthur have exhausted every option to
obtain immigration relief in the United States. While Ruben and Asmik's
other son, Arsen, is a U.S. citizen, he is too young to file a green
card petition on their behalf.
It would be a terrible shame to remove this family from the United
States and to separate them from Arsen, who is 20 years old and a U.S.
citizen. The Mkoians have worked hard to build a place for their family
in California and are an integral part of their community.
The family attends St. Paul Armenian Apostolic Church in Fresno. They
do charity work to send medical equipment to Armenia.
Ruben works as a driver for Uber. He previously worked as a manager
at a car wash in Fresno and as a truckdriver for a California trucking
company that described him as ``trustworthy,'' ``knowledgeable,'' and
an asset to the company. Asmik has worked as a medical assistant the
past 6 years at the Fresno Shields Medical Center.
Arthur has proven to be a hard-working, smart young man who applies
himself. He was recognized nationally for his scholastic achievement,
having maintained a 4.0 grade point average in high school and serving
as his class valedictorian. After graduating on the Dean's Merit List
from the University of California, Davis with a major in Chemistry, he
is now a full-time analyst at a water testing company. He also teaches
Armenian School on Saturdays at the church.
Arthur's brother, Arsen currently attends Fresno State University, is
majoring in Computer Science, and maintains a 3.8 GPA. These two young
men have already accomplished so much and clearly aspire to do great
things here in the United States.
Reflecting their contributions to their community, Representatives
George Radanovich and Jim Costa strongly supported this family's
ability to remain in the United States. When I first introduced a
private bill for the Mkoian family, I received more than 200 letters of
support and dozens of calls of support from friends and community
members, attesting to the positive impact that this family has had in
Fresno, California.
I believe that this case warrants our compassion. I respectfully ask
my colleagues to support this private legislation on behalf of the
Mkoian family.
____________________