[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

                          ____________________