[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 139 (Wednesday, August 5, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4899-S4901]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I have come to the floor again today to
speak about an obscure section of immigration law that has a direct
impact on the lives of literally millions of people living and working
in the United States. I am here to speak about the plight of immigrant
workers who are suffering because of a serious problem in our
immigration system, known as the green card backlog. Many of these
immigrants are essential workers helping to lead the fight against
COVID-19. We have just heard tributes on the floor to these healthcare
heroes from Senators on the other side.
[[Page S4900]]
This green card backlog, which I speak to, puts them and their
families at risk of losing their immigration status and being deported
from the United States. Under current law, there are not nearly enough
immigrant visas--also known as green cards--available each year. As a
result, many immigrants are stuck in crippling backlogs for years,
waiting and praying for the moment when their number comes up.
Close to 5 million future Americans are in line, waiting for these
green cards, including 1 million immigrant workers and their families.
Despite this number--5 million--there are only 226,000 family green
cards and 140,000 employment green cards available each year.
These backlogs are really hard on families. They are caught in
immigration limbo. What happens to the children is particularly awful.
Children in many of these families age out while the parents are
waiting for the green cards. What does that mean? They reach the age of
21, and then these children, as adults, face deportation because they
are no longer under the age of 21 by the time the green cards are
available.
The solution to the green card backlog is so clear: Increase the
number of green cards. I have introduced legislation known as the
RELIEF Act with Senator Pat Leahy and Senator Mazie Hirono. The RELIEF
Act would increase the number of green cards to clear the backlogs for
all immigrants waiting in line for green cards within 5 years. The
RELIEF Act would protect aging out children who qualify for a green
card based on the parents' immigration petition.
This RELIEF Act is not new; it is based on the bipartisan 2013
Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill. I know a little bit about it.
That bill was written by eight Senators, and I was one of them--four
Democrats, four Republicans. We worked for months. We took the bill
through the Senate Judiciary Committee. We faced 200 amendments, I
believe, and then brought it to the floor, subject to even more
amendments. At the end of the day, that bill passed with a strong
bipartisan vote of 68 to 32 on the floor of the Senate. But
Republicans, who controlled the House of Representatives, refused to
even consider this comprehensive immigration bill. If they had, we
wouldn't be here today. That bill and the provisions we added to it
eliminated the green card backlog.
Unfortunately, some of my colleagues on the Republican side are still
unwilling to increase the number of immigrant visas even by one. They
want to keep these immigrant workers on temporary visas where they are
at risk of losing their immigration status and being deported.
The senior Senator from Utah, Mr. Lee, introduced a bill, S. 386,
known as the Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act, to address the
green card backlog. I have a basic concern with Senator Lee's bill. S.
386 includes no--no--additional green cards.
Without additional green cards, S. 386 will not reduce the green card
backlog. Don't take it from me; listen to the nonpartisan Congressional
Research Service. Here is what they say about Senator Lee's
legislation: ``S. 386 would not reduce future backlogs compared to
current law.''
This is not a partisan group; it is the nonpartisan Congressional
Research Service. S. 386 would not reduce future backlogs.
Despite my concerns about Senator Lee's bill, I told him I was
willing to sit down and work in good faith to see if there was
something we could agree on. Last December, we reached an agreement--a
good one.
Republicans object to increasing the number of green cards, and, as a
result, even our agreement--the amendment we agreed to--wouldn't reduce
the green card backlog. But it was a good bill that we proposed.
Let me highlight two key provisions of this agreement. We protect
immigrants and their families stuck in the backlog. Immigrant workers
and their immediate family members would be allowed to ``early file''
for their green cards. This was a proposal from Senator Lee that I
thought was good and I was willing to support. That doesn't mean they
would receive their green cards early, but they would be able to switch
jobs and travel without losing their immigration status. That, to me,
was only sensible.
Early filing adds a critical protection that was not in Senator Lee's
original bill. It prevents the children of immigrant workers from aging
out of green card eligibility so they will not face deportation while
they are waiting for a green card.
Our agreement also would crack down on the abuse of H1-B temporary
work visas. The amendment we agreed to would prohibit a company from
hiring additional H1-B workers if the company's workforce were more
than 50 employees and more than 50 percent of them were temporary
workers.
These shell companies were created for outsourcing Americans jobs and
abusing the H1-B visa process. I know because Senator Grassley--
Republican of Iowa--and I introduced this reform years and years ago
when this abuse became so obvious. It targets the top recipients of H1-
B visas, which are outsourcing companies that use loopholes in the law
to exploit immigrant workers and to offshore American workers' jobs.
Two weeks ago, I came to the floor of the Senate to ask that we pass
this agreement. Unfortunately, at that moment, Senator Lee objected.
Instead, he offered a revised version of our December agreement,
including changes that are required by the Trump administration.
First, Senator Lee wants to remove a provision known as the hold
harmless clause. That assured immigrants who are already waiting for a
green card--sometimes for years--would not lose their place in line
because Congress changed the rules in the middle of the game.
Second, Senator Lee wanted to delay for 3 years the effective date of
this 50-50 rule to crack down on outsourcing companies. I don't believe
we should give these companies that are outsourcing American jobs and
exploiting immigrant workers a free pass for 3 years.
Third, Senator Lee wanted to delay for years early filing for people
who are stuck in the green card backlog. Any children who would age out
in the meantime would lose their chance for a green card and be subject
to deportation.
Those changes suggested by the Senator from Utah were unacceptable,
but because there are so many lives at stake here, families at stake
here--and I know the intensity of emotion behind this issue--I was
determined to keep working to see if we could find some common ground.
Last Tuesday, I sent Senator Lee another compromise offer. The Senate
Republican leader is planning to recess the Senate in a few days, so I
thought it was important to come to the floor today to try to pass this
proposal before the Senate convenes.
Let me be clear. This isn't how we are supposed to make laws in the
Senate. Last year, I sent a letter--joined by every Democrat on the
Senate Judiciary Committee--to the senior Senator from Texas, John
Cornyn, chair of the Immigration Subcommittee. We asked for the regular
order of business in the Senate, which so seldom occurs now. We asked
Senator Cornyn, as chair of the Immigration Subcommittee, to hold a
hearing on this complicated legislation that addresses the green card
backlog. We wanted them to include in the hearing consideration of
Senator Lee's bill and my legislation, the RELIEF Act. We requested a
hearing with witnesses, a markup, a bill, a vote in the committee, and
a vote on the floor. It is almost like something called the U.S. Senate
used to be. This would help the Senate to understand, during the course
of this hearing and debate, the impact of each of these proposals and
to pass legislation that would actually fix the backlog. That really is
how the Senate used to work. I know it is hard for newer Members to
believe it.
The Immigration Subcommittee is certainly not too busy to take up
this hearing. For this session of Congress, which began a year and a
half ago, the Immigration Subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary
Committee has held one hearing--one.
Unfortunately, Senator Cornyn rejected our request. This leaves me no
other option but to bring this proposal directly to the Senate floor.
Let me explain what my amendment would do.
First, it would ensure that the children of immigrant workers do not
age
[[Page S4901]]
out while waiting for a green card. This provision would not increase
the number of green cards. It would not provide any special benefits.
It would simply allow children of immigrant workers to keep their place
in line for a green card and to be protected from deportation until
they can get their green card.
Second, my amendment would delay the bill section that changes the
distribution of green cards by 1 year. This provision, which Senator
Lee actually proposed earlier this year, would not replace the hold-
harmless provision; however, it would allow processing time for
immigrants with pending applications to get their green cards.
Third, my amendment would allow for immediate implementation of the
50-50 H-1B visa rule. I was told that the purpose of delaying it 3
years was to protect those currently working for these companies. So
instead of the 3-year delay, my amendment would exempt renewals for
current H-1B employees, which gives current employees the chance to
apply for early filing without creating a loophole for outsourcing
firms.
What I offered Senator Lee after months and months of deliberation
and negotiation was a good-faith effort to find common ground. There
are so many lives at stake. So many families are following this debate
because it literally will decide the fate of each of these individuals
who are applying for the green cards and members of their family.
It is heartbreaking to meet these families who have been waiting for
years for a green card and to realize that the limitations of our
system today make it so difficult. Many of these are good, hard-working
people in America who are doing the right thing.
In my hometown of Springfield, IL, there are physicians whom I have
met and talked to personally who have driven hundreds of miles to plead
their case with me. This one physician brought his young daughter; I
think she was about 12 years old. I haven't forgotten her to this day.
She traveled 200 miles to beg me to try to help. That is why I came in
with this amendment in an effort to protect her and give her family a
chance to be part of America's future.
I will now request unanimous consent to pass my amendment.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Judiciary Committee
be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 1044 and the Senate
proceed to its immediate consideration; further, that the Durbin
substitute amendment at the desk be considered agreed to; the bill, as
amended, be considered read a third time and passed; and the motion to
reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no
intervening action or debate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Cotton). Is there objection?
The Senator from Utah.
Mr. LEE. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I want to
thank and appreciate the work done by my friend, my distinguished
colleague, the senior Senator from Illinois.
Senator Durbin and I have worked on many issues. We spent a lot of
time working on this particular bill. In our most recent round of
negotiations, he made a number of suggestions, and we incorporated many
of those. I wish we could incorporate all of them.
For the reasons that I gave a couple of weeks ago when we went
through this, there are some of them that I unfortunately can't agree
to because they would result in our inability to proceed. On that
basis, I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
The Senator from Utah
____________________