[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 189 (Tuesday, December 6, 2022)]
[House]
[Pages H8759-H8762]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 3648, EQUAL ACCESS TO GREEN CARDS 
 FOR LEGAL EMPLOYMENT ACT OF 2022; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 
 7946, VETERAN SERVICE RECOGNITION ACT OF 2022; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 1508 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 1508

       Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be 
     in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 3648) to 
     amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to eliminate the 
     per-country numerical limitation for employment-based 
     immigrants, to increase the per-country numerical limitation 
     for family-sponsored immigrants, and for other purposes. All 
     points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. 
     The amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by 
     the Committee on the Judiciary now printed in the bill, 
     modified by the amendment printed in part A of the report of 
     the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, shall be 
     considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be 
     considered as read. All points of order against provisions in 
     the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall 
     be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any 
     further amendment thereto, to final passage without 
     intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally 
     divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
     member of the Committee on the Judiciary or their respective 
     designees; (2) the further amendment printed in part B of the 
     report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this 
     resolution, if offered by the Member designated in the 
     report, which shall be in order without intervention of any 
     point of order, shall be considered as read, shall be 
     separately debatable for the time specified in the report 
     equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an 
     opponent, and shall not be subject to a demand for division 
     of the question; and (3) one motion to recommit.
       Sec. 2.  Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
     order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 7946) to 
     provide benefits for noncitizen members of the Armed Forces, 
     and for other purposes. All points of order against 
     consideration of the bill are waived. The amendment in the 
     nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on the 
     Judiciary now printed in the bill shall be considered as 
     adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. 
     All points of order against provisions in the bill, as 
     amended, are waived. The previous question shall be

[[Page H8760]]

     considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any 
     further amendment thereto, to final passage without 
     intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally 
     divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
     member of the Committee on the Judiciary or their respective 
     designees; (2) the further amendment printed in part C of the 
     report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this 
     resolution, if offered by the Member designated in the 
     report, which shall be in order without intervention of any 
     point of order, shall be considered as read, shall be 
     separately debatable for the time specified in the report 
     equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an 
     opponent, and shall not be subject to a demand for division 
     of the question; and (3) one motion to recommit.
       Sec. 3. (a) At any time through the legislative day of 
     Thursday, December 8, 2022, the Speaker may entertain motions 
     offered by the Majority Leader or a designee that the House 
     suspend the rules as though under clause 1 of rule XV with 
     respect to multiple measures described in subsection (b), and 
     the Chair shall put the question on any such motion without 
     debate or intervening motion.
       (b) A measure referred to in subsection (a) includes any 
     measure that was the object of a motion to suspend the rules 
     on the legislative day of December 5, 2022, December 6, 2022, 
     December 7, 2022, or December 8, 2022, in the form as so 
     offered, on which the yeas and nays were ordered and further 
     proceedings postponed pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX.
       (c) Upon the offering of a motion pursuant to subsection 
     (a) concerning multiple measures, the ordering of the yeas 
     and nays on postponed motions to suspend the rules with 
     respect to such measures is vacated to the end that all such 
     motions are considered as withdrawn.
       Sec. 4.  Notwithstanding clause 8 of rule XX, further 
     proceedings on a vote by the yeas and nays on the question of 
     adoption of a motion that the House suspend the rules offered 
     on the legislative day of December 5, 2022 may be postponed 
     through the legislative day of December 8, 2022.
       Sec. 5.  The requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII for a 
     two-thirds vote to consider a report from the Committee on 
     Rules on the same day it is presented to the House is waived 
     with respect to any resolution reported through the remainder 
     of the One Hundred Seventeenth Congress.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Carbajal). The gentleman from 
Massachusetts is recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield 
the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Mrs. 
Fischbach), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. 
During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the 
purpose of debate only.


                             General Leave

  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their 
remarks.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Massachusetts?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, 
House Resolution 1508, providing for consideration of two measures: 
H.R. 3648 and H.R. 7946.
  The rule provides for consideration of both H.R. 3648 and H.R. 7946 
under structured rules with 1 hour of debate each equally divided and 
controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
the Judiciary, self-executes a manager's amendment from Chairman Nadler 
for H.R. 3648, makes in order one amendment for each bill, and provides 
one motion to recommit for each measure.
  The rule provides the majority leader or his designee the ability 
this week to en bloc requested roll call votes on suspensions. The rule 
also provides that roll call votes on suspension bills considered on 
December 5 may be postponed through December 8. Lastly, the rule 
provides same-day authority for any rule reported through the remainder 
of the 117th Congress.
  Mr. Speaker, today we will consider two bills to reform our 
immigration system. Our current laws that govern employment-based and 
family-sponsored immigration visas desperately need updates. Estimates 
suggest that more than 880,000 people are in the green card backlog 
because of how broken our system is.
  H.R. 3648, the Equal Access to Green Cards for Legal Employment, or 
EAGLE, Act of 2022 begins to address the extensive green card backlog.
  The legislation eliminates per-country caps on employment-based visas 
and raises per-country caps for family-based visas to 15 percent.
  The other bill up for consideration today is H.R. 7946, the Veteran 
Service Recognition Act. It improves naturalization for noncitizens who 
served in our country's military. It seems straightforward to me. If 
you have risked your life to protect and defend this country, you and 
your family deserve every opportunity to become U.S. citizens, if 
desired.
  Now, while these two bills offer important reforms to our immigration 
system, I still personally believe there are also other urgent 
immigration issues that need to be addressed before the 117th Congress 
adjourns.
  We need residency for Dreamers, these young people who have known no 
other home but the United States.
  We must provide secure, stable immigration for agricultural workers 
who ensure food reaches our tables.
  We should recapture existing visas that have gone unused so we can 
really make a sizable dent in reducing immigration backlogs.
  And we need to regularize the status of long-term TPS holders who 
have been here for decades and are important members of our local 
communities.
  Republicans always talk about issues within our immigration system, 
but so far none have come to the table with any meaningful, realistic, 
or productive solutions that would help fix it. They can't get to 
``yes'' on anything. They demonize immigrants. They scapegoat 
immigrants, and rather than fix the challenges of our system, they use 
immigration as a wedge issue.
  Democrats, on the other hand, want comprehensive immigration reform. 
We are ready, willing, and able to work with anyone who seriously wants 
to get something done. It is time for our colleagues across the aisle 
to join us in this effort.
  These bills today are just the start, and my hope is that we are able 
to make more progress on this front before the end of the year.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to support this rule, and I 
reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  0915

  Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the Representative from 
Massachusetts for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield 
myself such time as I may consume.
  Today, we are here to discuss H.R. 3648, the Equal Access to Green 
Cards for Legal Employment, or the EAGLE Act, and H.R. 7946, the 
Veteran Service Recognition Act.
  The EAGLE Act would do away with country caps for certain employment-
based green cards. Unfortunately, the bill we are debating today 
changes a carefully negotiated and agreed-upon bill from last Congress, 
favoring a Democrat go-it-alone approach that, unfortunately, we have 
seen all too often in this body over the last 2 years.
  One of the most shocking changes is the exclusion of critical 
language to prevent those associated with the Chinese Communist Party 
or the Chinese armed forces from admission to these immigration 
programs.
  When this came through the Judiciary Committee, Congressman Bishop 
offered an amendment to add language that once again clarified that CCP 
members are ineligible to participate in these programs. That amendment 
failed on a party-line vote. We all know the CCP is not a good-faith 
actor, and I am appalled that the majority would risk our national 
security by rejecting that amendment.
  H.R. 7946, the Veteran Service Recognition Act, aims to establish a 
program within the DHS for noncitizens to receive citizenship through 
service in the military. Based on the title, it sounds like a good 
bill.
  Of course, those who served honorably in the Armed Forces should be 
honored for their valor and sacrifice. But despite the title, this bill 
did not even go through the Veterans' Affairs Committee.
  Why? Because it is just one more example of the Democrats exploiting 
a sympathetic population to push their open border policies. They 
should be ashamed.
  I will also point out that there are already procedures in place by 
which noncitizen servicemembers can be rewarded for their sacrifices 
for this country. The Immigration and Nationality Act established 
special avenues to naturalize members or veterans in the U.S. military. 
These procedures have been in place since 2002.

[[Page H8761]]

  Under the current INA, it rightfully does not offer this opportunity 
to those who are dishonorably discharged or those who have committed a 
serious crime. But the bill we are discussing today, either through 
poor drafting or purposeful vagueness, does offer a citizenship path to 
those people.
  In the Judiciary Committee, several amendments were offered to ensure 
dangerous criminals did not receive an adjustment of immigration 
status, amendments that included crimes like illicit trafficking in 
firearms and human trafficking, and each amendment failed.
  Why are my colleagues across the aisle so eager to have criminals on 
the streets of our communities?
  This bill doesn't even apply to just veterans. It would expand 
protections for noncitizen family members of veterans, who would 
otherwise be deported for committing crimes. Drug smugglers, human 
traffickers, and domestic abusers who never even served in our Armed 
Forces would be allowed to avoid deportation because of this bill.
  I am also concerned that this bill relies heavily on the 
interpretation of the Secretary of Homeland Security. As it is written, 
DHS does not have to deport nearly anyone, leaving it to the DHS 
Secretary to exercise discretion in almost all cases.
  Secretary Mayorkas has done nothing to ease the immigration crisis in 
this country.
  Do we really want to give someone like that more responsibility?
  I am skeptical that an individual who can't even admit that the 
border is not secure will treat this increased discretion in a manner 
that is required to keep our communities safe.
  Before I reserve, I will note that the rule before us provides no 
Republican amendments in order, continuing a trend by this majority of 
stifling debate and suppressing the minority party's opportunity to 
offer changes or ideas to improve the underlying bills.
  Mr. Speaker, it is for that reason I oppose the rule, and I ask 
Members to do the same.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Let me just say that here is the problem: We just heard from my 
colleague from Minnesota that Republicans are more interested in 
gimmicky amendments and sound bites as a way to try to get people to do 
nothing. I mean, they are the party of ``no'' when it comes to 
immigration.
  My colleague says somehow that the Democrats are blocking attempts to 
ban people associated with communist or totalitarian parties, that 
somehow we want to admit them into this country. Well, here is the 
reality, and this is the fact, and people can check this: Current law 
says individuals associated with a communist or totalitarian party are 
already inadmissible under section 212(a)(3)(d) of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act. That is the current law.
  At some point maybe my friends on the other side will want to help 
fix the immigration system, rather than just demagogue the issue over 
and over and over again.
  This is an issue, by the way, that is important to our economic well-
being. Our business community wants these bills passed in part because 
they are having a tough time trying to fill current jobs.
  So we can demagogue the issue, and if that is what you want to do, 
fine; or you can actually legislate and get something done.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I want to comment on the so-called gimmicky amendments. I don't see 
it as gimmicky when we are trying to stop criminals from staying in our 
country. I don't see it as gimmicky when we are trying to stop human 
traffickers. I don't see it as gimmicky when we are trying to stop 
those who have trafficked firearms. I don't see that as gimmicky. I see 
that as trying to protect the people of the country and making sure 
that we do not allow criminals to continue to stay in our country.

  As for the issue of current law, if it is the case that those 
associated with the CCP are already not allowed under current law, then 
there is no issue to just put this in the bill just in case and make 
sure that we have satisfied the concerns of people who are concerned 
about allowing those CCP members into the country.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, again, on traffickers and gun smugglers, 
and you name it, those things are already illegal, but whatever. It is 
not worth getting into it.
  Mr. Speaker, I have no other speakers on my side, and I reserve the 
balance of my time.
  Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I yield 
myself the balance of my time.
  This majority all too often uses flowery titles to mask the bill's 
true meaning. The Veteran Service Recognition Act is another one of 
these examples. It leads the public to believe we are looking at a bill 
that would recognize the service of our veterans. But once again, when 
you take a closer look, it becomes painfully clear that this is another 
push for open borders. This bill intends to pave a far broader pathway 
to citizenship not just for veterans. A path already exists for 
veterans since 2002, but this bill opens a path to criminals, something 
Democrats rejected every opportunity they had to keep criminals out of 
the program.
  In just 2 short years, the American people have watched as the 
situation at the southern border has deteriorated into nothing short of 
a crisis. I would have hoped that my colleagues would treat this 
situation a little more seriously, but unfortunately, I have come to 
expect nothing less.
  This bill is just one more example of how deeply unserious my 
colleagues in the majority are of addressing the disaster at our 
southern border. I oppose this rule, and I ask Members to do the same.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Let me remind all my colleagues that the Veteran Service Recognition 
Act is actually supported by the American Legion, one of our leading 
veterans' organizations in this country, but I guess that is not enough 
for some of my Republican colleagues again saying ``no'' to everything.
  Mr. Speaker, the EAGLE Act and the Veteran Service Recognition Act 
provide necessary reforms that will improve our immigration system. I 
know so much more can be done--as I said before, we need to do more--
but these two bills are small steps that we can take now to help clear 
backlogs and ensure that those who not only have played by the rules, 
but have sacrificed in the service of our Nation can become citizens. 
They are important policies that should become law.
  I read today that some of my friends on the other side of the aisle 
are urging their next leader--I don't know who it will be--to use the 
debt ceiling not only to cut Social Security and Medicare and a whole 
bunch of other programs that are vital, including nutrition programs, 
but they want to use it as leverage to go after immigrants to mess up 
our immigration system even more. What a rotten way to legislate, to 
use the debt ceiling as an excuse to try to derail government.
  We already know what the Republicans are capable of doing. The last 
time they were in charge of the House and the Senate and the White 
House, they shut the government down and they left. That is their idea 
of responsible governing.
  Well, we shouldn't be using the debt ceiling as leverage. We should 
actually be paying our bills that we have accumulated. If you don't 
like the spending--I didn't like Donald Trump's tax cut that benefited 
mostly wealthy people in this country; I nonetheless voted to increase 
the debt ceiling because we had accumulated all of that debt because of 
that terrible tax cut geared to the rich. It is the responsible thing 
to do. It really is kind of disturbing to hear some of the priorities 
of my Republican friends.
  As I said before, their policy on immigration has been consistent. 
Demagogue, demagogue, demagogue. Fix nothing. They blame immigrants for 
everything. It is raining out today; they will blame immigrants. Having 
a fight with their spouse; well, it must be the fault of immigrants. 
Having a bad day; let's blame immigrants. That is their MO. That is 
what they have done,

[[Page H8762]]

and it really is offensive. It betrays the highest values of this 
country.
  The two bills before us are modest. There is much more we need to do. 
As I said, we need to help the Dreamers. We need to fix the issue for 
our TPS holders. We owe that to them.
  Mr. Speaker, let me close by saying that we are going to spend the 
next few weeks legislating and delivering for the American people, and 
I urge some of my colleagues to join with us in getting things done, or 
they can simply do what they usually do and complain and complain and 
demagogue and demagogue.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule and on the previous 
question.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I 
move the previous question on the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on adoption of the 
resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on 
this question are postponed.

                          ____________________