[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 21]
[House]
[Pages 29112-29132]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 BORDER PROTECTION, ANTITERRORISM, AND ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION CONTROL ACT 
                                OF 2005

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Upton). Pursuant to House Resolution

[[Page 29113]]

621 and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of 
the Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration 
of the bill, H.R. 4437.

                              {time}  1512

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration of 
the bill (H.R. 4437) to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to 
strengthen enforcement of the immigration laws, to enhance border 
security, and for other purposes, with Mrs. Emerson (Acting Chairman) 
in the Chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. When the Committee of the Whole rose on Thursday 
December 15, 2005, amendment No. 12 printed in part B of House Report 
109-347 by the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) had been disposed 
of.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 621, no further general debate is in 
order and remaining proceedings pursuant to House Resolution 610 are 
subsumed by House Resolution 621.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 621, no further amendment is in order 
except those printed in House Report 109-350. Each further amendment 
may be offered only in the order printed in the report, by a Member 
designated in the report, shall be considered read, shall be debatable 
for the time specified in the report, equally divided and controlled by 
the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and 
shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question.


                Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Goodlatte

  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 1 printed in House Report 109-350 offered by 
     Mr. Goodlatte:
       At the end of the bill, add the following new title:

              TITLE IX--SECURITY AND FAIRNESS ENHANCEMENT

     SEC. 901. SHORT TITLE.

       This title may be cited as--
       (1) the ``Security and Fairness Enhancement for America Act 
     of 2005''; or
       (2) the ``SAFE for America Act''.

     SEC. 902. ELIMINATION OF DIVERSITY IMMIGRANT PROGRAM.

       (a) Worldwide Level of Diversity Immigrants.--Section 201 
     of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1151) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by inserting ``and'' at the end of paragraph (1);
       (B) by striking ``; and'' at the end of paragraph (2) and 
     inserting a period; and
       (C) by striking paragraph (3); and
       (2) by striking subsection (e).
       (b) Allocation of Diversity Immigrant Visas.--Section 203 
     of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1153) is amended--
       (1) by striking subsection (c);
       (2) in subsection (d), by striking ``(a), (b), or (c),'' 
     and inserting ``(a) or (b),'';
       (3) in subsection (e), by striking paragraph (2) and 
     redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (2);
       (4) in subsection (f), by striking ``(a), (b), or (c)'' and 
     inserting ``(a) or (b)''; and
       (5) in subsection (g), by striking ``(a), (b), and (c)'' 
     and inserting ``(a) and (b)''.
       (c) Procedure for Granting Immigrant Status.--Section 204 
     of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1154) is amended--
       (1) by striking subsection (a)(1)(I); and
       (2) in subsection (e), by striking ``(a), (b), or (c)'' and 
     inserting ``(a) or (b)''.
       (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect on October 1, 2006.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 621, the gentleman 
from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 
Conyers) each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Madam Chairman, I yield myself 1\1/2\ minutes.
  Madam Chairman, each year, the United States Government chooses the 
names of 50,000 people who will be given the status of legal permanent 
resident, not based on family or employer sponsorship nor based on any 
rationale reason, but based only pure luck through a random lottery. My 
amendment would eliminate the controversial visa lottery program. The 
visa lottery program presents a serious national security threat.
  A perfect example of the system gone awry is the case of Hesham 
Mohamed Hadayet, the Egyptian national who killed two and wounded three 
during a shooting spree at Los Angeles International Airport in July of 
2002. He was allowed to apply for legal permanent resident status in 
1997 because of his wife's status as a visa lottery winner.

                              {time}  1515

  The State Department's Inspector General has even testified before 
Congress this year that the Office of Inspector General continues to 
believe that the Diversity Visa Program contains significant risks to 
national security from hostile intelligence officers, criminals and 
terrorists attempting to use the program for entry into the United 
States as permanent residents.
  Do not gamble with national security. Join me in eliminating the visa 
lottery program.
  Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CONYERS. Madam Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes. I ask that the 
House carefully consider this amendment because it may in one respect 
represent a not-so-subtle attempt to dismantle the only program that 
guarantees that at least 4 percent of the new immigrants have a chance 
to come to this country from under-represented nations.
  The Diversity Visa Program is the chance for many people of color 
around the world to immigrate to the United States and pursue the same 
American dream that many of the ancestors of the Members here were able 
to pursue.
  There is no time in our Nation's history when race and ethnicity were 
not primary factors. So what we are asking here is that just as many 
great Americans have come to this country as refugees, I have no doubt 
that many great Americans have and are coming through the diversity 
program. You need only to look at the promise of young Freddie Adu, the 
teenage boy who is the newest star on the National Soccer League and 
the youngest professional player in the United States. He has got great 
promise, and but for his entry to the United States on the Diversity 
Visa Program, that promise might not have been realized.
  I urge my colleagues to consider this amendment carefully. I hope 
that it will be turned back. Let us not dismantle an important and 
valuable program.
  Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Madam Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), the chairman of the Committee on the 
Judiciary.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Chairman, I rise in support of this 
amendment. I wanted to make a couple of points.
  First of all, the visa lottery system has been susceptible to fraud. 
Doing away with it would do away with fraud. Secondly, the visa lottery 
system does not give visas to people from ``over-represented 
countries,'' and that includes Mexico. So no Mexican is eligible to get 
a visa on the visa lottery system. I think that is discriminatory.
  Also, the visa lottery system is unfair because the winners go ahead 
of spouses and children of lawful permanent residents, including 
Mexicans, and married sons and daughters of citizens who have waited 
for visas, in some instances for years. It also is used as a potential 
for aliens who pose a danger to Americans.
  I think that with all these problems in the visa lottery system, the 
best thing to do is pass this amendment and get rid of it.
  Mr. CONYERS. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Chairman, the problem about fraud in this program is that 
people apply multiple times when the rules only allow one application a 
year per person. In some cases, multiple applications are the result of 
people trying to cheat the system; but in other cases, people may apply 
not understanding that, unlike many other lotteries, multiple 
applications are not allowed and do not really improve your chances.
  The State Department has already addressed this in several ways. This 
program, I want to emphasize to the membership, is extremely valuable 
for

[[Page 29114]]

those countries that have so very few people coming in under the 
regular system, and I would not want us to take this out of the present 
law. It is working well. We have had many success stories, and we think 
that there is not a serious history of fraud in the program.
  Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman 
yield?
  Mr. CONYERS. I yield to the gentlewoman from California.
  Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Madam Chairman, I would just note, 
according to the State Department Visa Bulletin for next month, really 
this is primarily numerically the greatest number of individuals who 
benefit are from the continent of Africa. And because of immigration 
patterns, this is an important element of an opportunity for the 
American dream for would-be Americans who are coming from the continent 
of Africa. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. CONYERS. Reclaiming my time, I appreciate the gentlewoman's 
remarks.
  Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Madam Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman 
from South Dakota (Ms. Herseth). This bipartisan amendment is based 
upon legislation introduced by myself and the gentlewoman.
  Ms. HERSETH. Madam Chairman, I rise today in strong support of this 
important amendment to eliminate the Diversity Visa Program, otherwise 
known as the visa lottery. I thank my good friend, the gentleman from 
Virginia, for the time.
  Chairman Goodlatte and Chairman Sensenbrenner have effectively 
outlined the serious security risk posed by the visa lottery program 
and the flaws in the administration of the program, so I will not 
repeat them at this time. But I would like to address a question raised 
by some of my colleagues: whether it would be possible to reallocate 
the visas currently utilized by the visa lottery program and add them 
to the family-sponsored and employer-based categories.
  Although the amendment we are offering today does not reallocate the 
diversity visas, I am committed to working with Chairman Goodlatte and 
our colleagues in the Senate to do just that.
  I believe strongly that the elimination of the visa lottery program 
will strengthen our national security, that our amendment is an 
appropriate and necessary step towards resolution of this issue. I 
believe strongly that if our amendment passes today, we can negotiate a 
compromise that will ensure reallocation of some or all of the 
immigrant visas available under this outdated and problematic program 
which has deviated from its original purpose.
  I encourage my colleagues to join me in voting in favor of this 
amendment.
  Mr. CONYERS. Madam Chairman, how much time remains on both sides?
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) has 1 
minute remaining. The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte) has 2 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. CONYERS. Madam Chairman, as we have the right to close, I will 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Madam Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Smith).
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Madam Chairman, I want to thank Chairman 
Goodlatte and Ms. Herseth for offering this amendment to eliminate the 
Diversity Visa Program. This program discriminates against people from 
Mexico and six other countries. It is susceptible to rampant fraud. It 
allows 50,000 people to enter the country whether or not they have 
family ties or needed skills and is unfair to immigrants who play by 
the rules.
  Immigrant visas are usually issued to foreign nationals who have 
connections to U.S. employers or family members lawfully residing in 
the United States. Under the visa lottery program, though, visas are 
awarded to immigrants at random without meeting any of these criteria.
  Most family-sponsored immigrants currently face a wait of years to 
obtain visas. Yet the lottery program pushes 50,000 randomly picked 
immigrants ahead of those who are sponsored by family and employers.
  Madam Chairman, we should not have an immigration program that 
violates the principles of common sense, fairness and non-
discrimination.
  Mr. CONYERS. Madam Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman 
from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Let me make a simple statement. This is 
legal immigration; that is what we are trying to promote here in this 
Congress. The State Department has already testified that this program 
is a program that is improved, and it works internationally to bring in 
our developing nations as friends of the United States.
  Mr. CONYERS. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Madam Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman 
from Virginia (Mr. Boucher), another of the bipartisan supporters of 
this legislation.
  Mr. BOUCHER. Madam Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
time. I rise in support of his amendment.
  The visa lottery is an affront both to logic and to the effective 
functioning of the visa system. Based upon nothing other than pure 
luck, 50,000 permanent resident visas are annually awarded. Lottery 
winners are admitted ahead of deserving family members who have played 
by the rules and endured long waits. It is a flawed system. The time to 
end it has come. I support the Goodlatte amendment which would end this 
system. I urge its adoption by the House.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Madam Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman 
from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) to close the debate.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Madam Chairman, certainly there is a better way to 
engender diversity. We could perhaps reallocate these visas to the 
families of those who have won the lottery previously who have become 
good citizens.
  But the point is, does America want to have a lottery to get the 
best, the most skilled people from around the world or the most diverse 
people from around the world? And I think not.
  It has been subject to fraud. My office every day deals with people 
whose families have been waiting 5, 6, 7, 8 years patiently in line 
around the world to come here from the Philippines, from Mexico, from 
India and other countries. Should they get bumped to the back while 
some random person comes first? I think not.
  Mr. CONYERS. Madam Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  This amendment, I think, has been mischaracterized seriously. To 
allow 4 percent of new immigrants to have a chance to come to the 
country from under-represented nations is a way of addressing the 
imbalance that I do not think anybody would disagree with that exists 
in the immigration patterns, whether they are accidental or purposeful.
  There has been no time when race and ethnicity were not primary 
factors in immigration policy. Please, I think this is a very important 
provision. The Diversity Visa Program should be sustained, and I hope 
that the amendment will be turned away.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote, and 
pending that, I make the point of order that a quorum is not present.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte) 
will be postponed.
  The point of no quorum is considered withdrawn.


                 Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Filner

  Mr. FILNER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 2 printed in House Report 109-350 offered by 
     Mr. Filner:

[[Page 29115]]

       Section 1546(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended 
     in the first paragraph by inserting ``distributes (or intends 
     to distribute),'' before ``or falsely'' the first place it 
     appears.

       Section 1546(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended 
     in the first paragraph by inserting ``distributed,'' before 
     ``or falsely'' the second place it appears.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 621, the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Filner) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. FILNER. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Chairman, I appreciate the majority's acceptance of this 
amendment for discussion. I did have other amendments which I thought 
were more important and more helpful to this bill. For example, in this 
bill, in section 607, we compensate various local law enforcement 
agencies of border counties, of which I represent two, for detaining, 
housing and transporting undocumented persons. The biggest problem for 
the counties on the border is the emergency health care providers who 
are not reimbursed for treatment of undocumenteds.

                              {time}  1530

  My amendment, introduced in the House as H.R. 2934, is called 
``PayUp,'' Pay for All Your Undocumented Procedures. It authorizes the 
Federal Government to make payment to emergency ambulance and medical 
services for the cost of uncompensated care of undocumented persons 
that come to their facility aided by the Border Patrol or any other 
Federal immigration agency. Unfortunately, that amendment was not 
accepted for discussion.
  Another amendment would have allowed children in Mexico who have 
serious medical problems, for example birth defects, to come across the 
border as they did before 9/11 with 1-day visas for emergency 
treatment. For the 40 years before 9/11, we were able to give lives 
back to about 125,000 young children, poor children who were treated in 
my city of Calexico at the Valley Orthopedic Center. After 9/11, these 
1-day visas were prohibited. That would have helped not only our 
relationship between our two countries but allowed our medical 
technology to help poor and young people who are living in Mexico. That 
amendment was not accepted.
  What was accepted is a technical correction that I will briefly 
explain, because the bill in most respects takes a wrong approach 
toward our illegal immigration problem.
  In this case, instead of making it a criminal act to sell and 
distribute fraudulent documents, the bill targets those who are trying 
to stay in the United States. My amendment fixes this fundamental 
problem by making the distribution or intent to distribute false, fake, 
or counterfeit immigration documents as much of a crime as creating or 
using them. Let us be clear. We are talking about the sale and 
distribution of illegal documents. I represent the whole California-
Mexico border. There is an industry dedicated to the counterfeiting and 
distribution of these documents. These are the people we ought to go 
after, and these are the people who, because of a loophole in the bill, 
are exempted. We have arrested people in San Diego for distributing 
false documents, but there is a loophole which allows them to escape 
that charge.
  This is a crime that we ought to be going after. The current 
government statutes that deal with fraudulent documents completely 
ignore the distribution of passports, visas, and other permits, which, 
in my opinion, is the true crime. We should go after the real criminals 
who are profiting by the sale and distribution of these documents. It 
is a simple correction of the law that will strengthen penalties. While 
we might disagree about broader immigration policy, we all agree that 
the selling of fake and fraudulent and illegal documents should be 
stopped. I urge the adoption of this amendment.
  Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Chairman, I rise to claim the time in 
opposition, even though I am not against the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mrs. Emerson). Without objection, the gentleman 
is recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment which adds 
distribution of fraudulent immigration documents to the list of 
criminal offenses.
  Document fraud is a serious offense that enables our immigration laws 
to be violated and creates a national security threat. Controlling the 
production and distribution of false immigration documents is a 
critical component to effective immigration reform. Currently, the 
criminal code provides stiff penalties for those who forge, 
counterfeit, or alter visas, border-crossing cards, or other similar 
types of documents.
  However, the statute does not currently mention distribution of 
fraudulent documents among the enumerated offenses. This amendment 
would help prosecutors go after those who are not necessarily producing 
the fake documents, but those who are making them available on the 
black market. Those who distribute or sell false documents deserve the 
same harsh penalties as those who forge or counterfeit the documents. I 
urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  Madam Chairman, since I have the right to close, I reserve the 
balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will not have the right to close 
since he is not opposed to the amendment.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. FILNER. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Chairman, I thank the chairman for accepting this amendment and 
for his common sense approach to this issue. I hope that you will look 
at the two other common sense amendments I mentioned when you get to 
conference. Not allowing children to cross for emergency medical 
procedures makes no sense at all. These are not terrorists; these are 
young children. We are giving them back their futures, and we ought to 
change the law to allow medical treatment.
  In addition, you ought to put emergency medical providers on the list 
of people to be compensated when they deal with undocumented persons. I 
hope you will extend that common sense and courtesy that you have given 
me in this amendment and extend it to the others, too.
  Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Filner).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Hayworth

  Mr. HAYWORTH. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 3 printed in House Report 109-350 offered by 
     Mr. Hayworth:
       At the end of the bill, insert the following:

                  TITLE IX--AMENDMENTS TO VISA NUMBERS

     SEC. 901. ELIMINATION OF FAMILY 4TH PREFERENCE VISA CATEGORY 
                   FOR ADULT SIBLINGS OF CITIZENS.

       (a) In General.--Section 203(a) of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(a)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``paragraph (4)'' and 
     inserting ``paragraph (3)''; and
       (2) by striking paragraph (4).
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--The Immigration and Nationality 
     Act is amended--
       (1) in section 201(c)(1)(A)(i) (8 U.S.C. 1151(c)(1)(A)(i)), 
     by striking ``480,000'' and inserting ``415,000'';
       (2) in section 204(a)(1)(A)(i) (8 U.S.C. 1154(a)(1)(A)(i)), 
     by striking ``(1), (3), or (4)'' and inserting ``(1) or 
     (3)''; and
       (3) in section 212(d)(11) (8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(11)), by 
     striking ``(other than paragraph (4) thereof)''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to visa numbers for fiscal years beginning with 
     the first fiscal year beginning after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.

[[Page 29116]]



     SEC. 902. INCREASE IN EMPLOYMENT BASED VISAS.

       (a) In General.--Section 201(d)(1)(A) of the Immigration 
     and Nationality Act is amended by striking ``140,000'' and 
     inserting ``205,000''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall apply beginning with the first fiscal year that begins 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 621, the gentleman 
from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. HAYWORTH. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Chairman, the amendment I plan to offer today simply cannot be 
considered outside a comprehensive immigration reform effort, which, 
respectfully, this bill is not. Therefore, I would like to use my time 
to discuss the principle reflected in my amendment, one that thus far 
has been absent from this debate.
  Madam Chairman, as we consider ways to meet our legitimate labor 
needs, the choice before us is not limited to doing nothing or jumping 
into a guest worker plan we all know will never work and I promise we 
will one day regret. There is another way.
  Madam Chairman, we already have an immigration system in place that 
we can amend and change to reconcile economic demands with other 
important priorities, such as diversity of admissions. The worker 
scheme is based on the same defeatist notion that we cannot stop it, so 
we might as well legalize it, used by proponents of legalizing drugs 
and prostitution. Legalization has not worked for those vices and it 
will not work for illegal immigration.
  Some have the audacity to claim a guest worker plan is not amnesty 
because it does not, in the President's words, place undocumented 
workers on an automatic path to citizenship. Madam Chairman, what does 
citizenship have to do with it? Most illegals do not come here with a 
copy of the Constitution in their back pockets yearning to become 
Americans. They come here mostly for one reason: a job. You can call it 
legalization or earned status adjustment or regularization, but a guest 
worker plan that lets illegals keep their jobs is amnesty.
  Madam Chairman, do not take my word for it. Here is what the 
President of the National Council of La Raza said of the distinction 
between legalization and amnesty: ``The net effect is the same.''
  Madam Chairman, under a guest worker plan, illegal aliens would be 
pardoned for all their document and employment-related crimes, get 
credit toward Social Security benefits for what they have earned 
illegally, and get to bring in their families and unfairly gain for 
their children born here one of the most coveted distinctions on Earth, 
that of American citizenship.
  Madam Chairman, my colleagues, as we consider ways to stop illegal 
immigration, we should be guided by two principles: number one, do not 
reward law breakers, including illegal aliens or those who hire them; 
number two, do not create incentives for even more illegal immigration.
  A guest worker scheme violates both. It also has something else going 
against it, Madam Chairman: history. There has never been a successful 
guest worker program, not here, not in Europe, not anywhere. Those 
rioting in France are the children of temporary workers who never left. 
Saudi Arabia's 6 million guest workers live under conditions that have 
been called modern-day slavery. A guest worker plan would likewise 
create an American caste system that would insult our heritage. Our own 
bracero programs were ended because they lowered wages for American 
workers, exploited foreign workers and illegal immigration.
  Guest worker proponents say our economy needs illegal alien workers; 
but under a guest worker plan, they would have to leave in 6 years.
  Madam Chairman, are we supposed to believe we will stop needing them 
at that time? And what happens when guest workers do not leave as 
required? Will all those now promoting this discredited idea be out 
there leading the cause to round them up, or will they instead move to 
grant them citizenship?
  Madam Chairman, if we are feeble enough to allow a guest worker plan 
to be added to this bill, it will be 1986 all over again: amnesty now, 
enforcement never, and an unending wave of illegal immigration.
  Again, there is a better way: reform our legal immigration system to 
attract the kind of high-skilled workers that our economy really needs.
  Madam Chairman, immigration must serve the national interests, not 
just the interests of businesses hooked on cheap labor or left wing 
political activists out to reshape American politics and culture.
  Madam Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that my amendment be 
withdrawn.
  Mr. BERMAN. Madam Chairman, reserving the right to object, and I do 
not intend to object, might I ask the author of the amendment, as he 
was speaking I was wondering what was going on. It sounded like he was 
giving a very articulate and reasoned, I disagree with some of the 
points, but reasoned position for an amendment that he was not allowed 
to offer under this rule.
  I am wondering whether he thought it might have been appropriate that 
a coequal branch of the Congress, the House of Representatives, on an 
issue as fundamental as the one he has just spoken to might have been 
allowed to have had a couple of amendments in order for this issue to 
be discussed and voted on in this body. Would that have been a sensible 
way to approach this issue?
  Mr. HAYWORTH. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield.
  Mr. BERMAN. I yield to the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. HAYWORTH. Madam Chairman, I thank my friend from California.
  Madam Chairman, I would say to my friend from California, my votes on 
procedural questions speak for themselves in this regard. I thank the 
gentleman for his time.
  Mr. BERMAN. Madam Chairman, further reserving the right to object, in 
case anyone noticed, the gentleman from Arizona did not support rules 
which prevented us from discussing maybe the most important issue 
involved in the context of whether or not to pursue comprehensive 
immigration reform.
  Madam Chairman, I withdraw my reservation.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
  There was no objection.


              Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Sensenbrenner

  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 4 printed in House Report 109-350 offered by 
     Mr. Sensenbrenner:
       In section 102--
       (1) in subsection (b), in the matter before paragraph (1), 
     strike ``Committee on Homeland Security of the House of 
     Representatives'' and insert ``appropriate congressional 
     committees'';
       (2) in subsection (b)(3), insert ``, except for ports of 
     entry and facilities subject to vulnerability assessments 
     under section 70102 or 70103 of title 46, United States 
     Code,'' after ``borders of the United States'';
       (3) amend subsection (d) to read as follows:
       (d) Coordination.-- The National Strategy for Border 
     Security described in subsection (b) shall be consistent with 
     the National Strategy for Maritime Security developed 
     pursuant to Homeland Security Presidential Directive 13.
       (4) in subsection (f), strike ``Committee on Homeland 
     Security of the House of Representatives, such Committee 
     shall promptly report to the House'' and insert ``appropriate 
     congressional committees, such committees shall promptly 
     report to their respective House'';
       (5) in subsection (g), insert ``and section 301(b)'' after 
     ``this title''; and
       (6) add at the end the following new subsection:
       (h) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be 
     construed to alter, impact, diminish, or in any way undermine 
     the authority of the Administrator of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration to oversee, regulate, and control the safe and 
     efficient use of the airspace of the United States.

[[Page 29117]]

       In section 111, strike ``Committee on Homeland Security of 
     the House of Representatives'' and insert ``appropriate 
     congressional committees''.
       At the end of title I, add the following new section:

     SEC. 118. VOLUNTARY RELOCATION PROGRAM EXTENSION.

       Section 5739(e) of title 5, United States Code, is amended 
     by striking ``7'' and inserting ``12''.
       In section 203, amend paragraph (3) to read as follows:
       (3) by amending subsection (c) to read as follows:
       ``(c)(1) Whoever--
       ``(A) knowingly enters into a marriage for the purpose of 
     evading any provision of the immigration laws; or
       ``(B) knowingly misrepresents the existence or 
     circumstances of a marriage--
       ``(i) in an application or document arising under or 
     authorized by the immigration laws of the United States or 
     the regulations prescribed thereunder, or
       ``(ii) during any immigration proceeding conducted by an 
     administrative adjudicator (including an immigration officer 
     or examiner, a consular officer, an immigration judge, or a 
     member of the Board of Immigration Appeals);
     shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, or 
     imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.
       ``(2) Whoever--
       ``(A) knowingly enters into two or more marriages for the 
     purpose of evading any provision of the immigration laws; or
       ``(B) knowingly arranges, supports, or facilitates two or 
     more marriages designed or intended to evade any provision of 
     the immigration laws;
     shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, imprisoned 
     not less than 2 years nor more than 20 years, or both.
       ``(3) An offense under this subsection continues until the 
     fraudulent nature of the marriage or marriages is discovered 
     by an immigration officer.
       ``(4) For purposes of this section, the term `proceeding' 
     includes an adjudication, interview, hearing, or review.''
       In section 275(e)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality 
     Act, proposed to be inserted by section 203(5)--
       (1) in subparagraph (A), strike ``(other than an aggravated 
     felony)''; and
       (2) strike subparagraph (B) and insert the following:
       (B) whose violation was subsequent to conviction for a 
     felony for which the alien received a sentence of 30 months 
     or more, shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, 
     imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both; or
       (C) whose violation was subsequent to conviction for a 
     felony for which the alien received a sentence of 60 months 
     or more, shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, 
     imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.
       In proposed section 275(e)(3) of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act, as inserted by section 203(5)--
       (1) strike ``(A) or (B)'' and insert ``(A), (B), or (C)''; 
     and
       (2) strike ``an aggravated felony or other qualifying 
     crime'' and insert ``a qualifying crime''.
       Strike section 210, and insert the following:

     SEC. 210. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE FORENSIC DOCUMENTS LABORATORY.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall 
     establish a Fraudulent Documents Center (to be known as the 
     Forensic Document Laboratory) to carry out the following:
       (1) Collect information from Federal, State, and local law 
     enforcement agencies, and foreign governments on the 
     production, sale, distribution, and use of fraudulent 
     documents intended to be used to enter, travel, or remain 
     within the United States unlawfully.
       (2) Maintain the information described in paragraph (1) in 
     a comprehensive database.
       (3) Maintain a repository of genuine and fraudulent travel 
     and identity document exemplars.
       (4) Convert the information collected into reports that 
     provide guidance to government officials in identifying 
     fraudulent documents being used to enter into, travel within, 
     or remain in the United States.
       (5) Develop a system for distributing these reports on an 
     ongoing basis to appropriate Federal, State, and local law 
     enforcement agencies.
       (b) Distribution of Information.--The Forensic Document 
     Laboratory shall distribute its reports to appropriate 
     Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies on an 
     ongoing basis.
       At the end of title II, add the following new sections:

     SEC. 211. MOTIONS TO REOPEN OR RECONSIDER.

       (a) Exercise of Discretion.--Section 240(c) of the 
     Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1229a(c)) is 
     amended--
       (1) by adding at the end of paragraph (5) the following new 
     subparagraph:
       ``(D) Discretion.--The decision to grant or deny a motion 
     to reconsider is committed to the Attorney General's 
     discretion.''; and
       (2) by adding at the end of paragraph (6) the following new 
     subparagraph:
       ``(D) Discretion.--The decision to grant or deny a motion 
     to reopen is committed to the Attorney General's 
     discretion.''.
       (b) Prima Facie Eligibility for Protection From Removal to 
     Alternative Country of Removal not Previously Considered.--
     Section 240(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 
     U.S.C. 1229a) is further amended by adding at the end of 
     paragraph (6) the following new subparagraph:
       ``(E) Special rule for alternative countries of removal.--
     The time and numerical limitations specified in this 
     paragraph shall not apply if--
       ``(i) the Secretary seeks to remove the alien to an 
     alternative or additional country of removal under 
     subparagraph (D) or (E) of section 241(b)(2) that had not 
     been considered during the alien's prior removal proceedings;
       ``(ii) the alien's motion to reopen is filed within 30 days 
     after the date the alien receives notice of the Secretary's 
     intention to remove the alien to that country; and
       ``(iii) the alien establishes a prima facie case that the 
     alien is entitled by law to withholding of removal under 
     section 241(b)(3) or protection under the Convention Against 
     Torture with respect to that particular country.''.
       (c) Effective Date.--This section, and the amendments made 
     by this section, shall apply to motions to reopen and 
     reconsider that are filed on or after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act in removal, deportation, or exclusion 
     proceedings, regardless of whether a final administrative 
     order is entered before, on, or after such date.

     SEC. 212. REFORM OF PASSPORT, VISA, AND IMMIGRATION FRAUD 
                   OFFENSES.

       Chapter 75 of title 18, United States Code is amended to 
     read as follows:

          ``CHAPTER 75--PASSPORT, VISA, AND IMMIGRATION FRAUD

``1541. Trafficking in passports.
``1542. False statement in an application for a passport.
``1543. Forgery and unlawful production of a passport.
``1544. Misuse of a passport.
``1545. Schemes to defraud aliens.
``1546. Immigration and visa fraud.
``1547. Attempts and conspiracies.
``1548. Increased penalties for certain offenses.
``1549. Seizure and forfeiture.
``1550. Additional jurisdiction.
``1551. Additional venue.
``1552. Definitions.
``1553. Authorized law enforcement activities.

     ``Sec. 1541. Trafficking in passports

       ``(a) Whoever, during any three-year period--
       ``(1) knowingly and without lawful authority produces, 
     issues, or transfers 10 or more passports; or
       ``(2) knowingly forges, counterfeits, alters, or falsely 
     makes 10 or more passports; or
       ``(3) knowingly secures, possesses, uses, receives, buys, 
     or sells 10 or more passports, knowing the passports to be 
     forged, counterfeited, altered, falsely made, stolen, 
     procured by fraud, issued, or designed for the use of 
     another, or produced or issued without lawful authority; or
       ``(4) knowingly completes, mails, prepares, presents, 
     signs, or submits 10 or more applications for a United States 
     passport (including any supporting documentation) knowing the 
     applications to contain any false statement or 
     representation;

     shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not less than 3 
     years nor more than 20 years, or both.
       ``(b) Whoever knowingly and without lawful authority 
     produces, counterfeits, secures, possesses, or uses any 
     official paper, seal, hologram, image, text, symbol, stamp, 
     engraving, plate, or other material used to make a passport 
     shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not less than 3 
     years nor more than 20 years, or both.

     ``Sec. 1542. False statement in an application for a passport

       ``Whoever knowingly--
       ``(1) makes any false statement or representation in an 
     application for a United States passport (including any 
     supporting documentation); or
       ``(2) completes, mails, prepares, presents, signs, or 
     submits an application for a United States passport 
     (including any supporting documentation) knowing it to 
     contain any false statement or representation; or
       ``(3) causes or attempts to cause the production of a 
     passport by means of any fraud or false application for a 
     United States passport (including any supporting 
     documentation), when such production occurs or would occur at 
     a facility authorized by the Secretary of State for the 
     production of passports;
     shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 
     years, or both.

     ``Sec. 1543. Forgery and unlawful production of a passport

       ``(a) Whoever--
       ``(1) knowingly forges, counterfeits, alters, or falsely 
     makes any passport; or
       ``(2) knowingly transfers any passport knowing it to be 
     forged, counterfeited, altered, falsely made, stolen, or to 
     have been produced or issued without lawful authority;

[[Page 29118]]

     shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 
     years, or both.
       ``(b) Whoever knowingly and without lawful authority--
       ``(1) produces, issues, authorizes, or verifies a passport 
     in violation of the laws, regulations, or rules governing the 
     issuance of the passport; or
       ``(2) produces, issues, authorizes, or verifies a United 
     States passport for or to any person not owing allegiance to 
     the United States; or
       ``(3) transfers or furnishes a passport to a person for use 
     when such person is not the person for whom the passport was 
     issued or designed;

     shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 
     years, or both.

     ``Sec. 1544. Misuse of a passport

       ``(a) Whoever--
       ``(1) knowingly uses any passport issued or designed for 
     the use of another; or
       ``(2) knowingly uses any passport in violation of the 
     conditions or restrictions therein contained, or in violation 
     of the laws, regulations, or rules governing the issuance and 
     use of the passport; or
       ``(3) knowingly secures, possesses, uses, receives, buys, 
     or sells any passport knowing it to be forged, counterfeited, 
     altered, falsely made, procured by fraud, or produced or 
     issued without lawful authority; or
       ``(4) knowingly violates the terms and conditions of any 
     safe conduct duly obtained and issued under the authority of 
     the United States;
     shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 
     years, or both.
       ``(b) Whoever knowingly uses any passport--
       ``(1) to enter or to attempt to enter the United States, or
       ``(2) to defraud an agency of the United States, a State, 
     or a political subdivision of a State,

     knowing the passport to be forged, counterfeited, altered, 
     falsely made, procured by fraud, produced or issued without 
     lawful authority, or issued or designed for the use of 
     another, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not less 
     than 6 months nor more than 15 years, or both.

     ``Sec. 1545. Schemes to defraud aliens

       ``(a) Whoever knowingly defrauds any person in connection 
     with--
       ``(1) any matter that is authorized by or arises under the 
     immigration laws of the United States, or
       ``(2) any matter the offender claims or represents is 
     authorized by or arises under the immigration laws of the 
     United States,

     shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 
     years, or both.
       ``(b) Whoever knowingly and falsely represents himself to 
     be an attorney in any matter authorized by or arising under 
     the immigration laws of the United States shall be fined 
     under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both.

     ``Sec. 1546. Immigration and visa fraud

       ``(a) Whoever--
       ``(1) knowingly uses any immigration document issued or 
     designed for the use of another; or
       ``(2) knowingly forges, counterfeits, alters, or falsely 
     makes any immigration document; or
       ``(3) knowingly completes, mails, prepares, presents, 
     signs, or submits any immigration document knowing it to 
     contain any materially false statement or representation; or
       ``(4) knowingly secures, possesses, uses, transfers, 
     receives, buys, or sells any immigration document knowing it 
     to be forged, counterfeited, altered, falsely made, stolen, 
     procured by fraud, issued or designed for another, or 
     produced or issued without lawful authority; or
       ``(5) knowingly adopts or uses a false or fictitious name 
     to evade or to attempt to evade the immigration laws; or
       ``(6) knowingly and without lawful authority transfers or 
     furnishes an immigration document to a person for use when 
     such person is not the person for whom the immigration 
     document was issued or designed;

     shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 
     years, or both.
       ``(b) Whoever, during any three-year period--
       ``(1) knowingly and without lawful authority produces, 
     issues, or transfers 10 or more immigration documents; or
       ``(2) knowingly forges, counterfeits, alters, or falsely 
     makes 10 or more immigration documents; or
       ``(3) knowingly secures, possesses, uses, buys, or sells 10 
     or more immigration documents, knowing the immigration 
     documents to be forged, counterfeited, altered, stolen, 
     falsely made, procured by fraud, or issued or designed for 
     the use of another, or produced or issued without lawful 
     authority; or
       ``(4) knowingly completes, mails, prepares, presents, 
     signs, or submits 10 or more immigration documents knowing 
     the documents to contain any materially false statement or 
     representation;

     shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not less than 2 
     years nor more than 20 years, or both.
       ``(c) Whoever knowingly and without lawful authority 
     produces, counterfeits, secures, possesses, or uses any 
     official paper, seal, hologram, image, text, symbol, stamp, 
     engraving, plate, or other material used to make an 
     immigration document shall be fined under this title, 
     imprisoned not less than 2 years nor more than 20 years, or 
     both.

     ``Sec. 1547. Attempts and conspiracies

       ``Whoever attempts or conspires to violate any section 
     within this chapter shall be punished in the same manner as a 
     completed violation of that section. An attempt offense under 
     this chapter is a general intent crime.

     ``Sec. 1548. Increased penalties for certain offenses

       ``(a) Whoever violates any of the sections within this 
     chapter with the intent to facilitate an act of international 
     terrorism (as defined in section 2331 of this title) shall be 
     fined under this title, imprisoned not less than 7 years nor 
     more than 25 years, or both.
       ``(b) Whoever violates any section in this chapter with the 
     intent to facilitate the commission of any offense against 
     the United States (other than an offense in this chapter) or 
     against any State, which offense is punishable by 
     imprisonment for more than 1 year, shall be fined under this 
     title, imprisoned not less than 3 years nor more than 20 
     years, or both.

     ``Sec. 1549. Seizure and forfeiture

       ``(a) Any property, real or personal, that has been used to 
     commit or facilitate the commission of a violation of any 
     section within this chapter, the gross proceeds of such 
     violation, and any property traceable to such property or 
     proceeds, shall be subject to forfeiture.
       ``(b) Seizures and forfeitures under this section shall be 
     governed by the provisions of chapter 46 of this title, 
     relating to civil forfeitures, including section 981(d) of 
     such title, except that such duties as are imposed upon the 
     Secretary of the Treasury under the customs laws described in 
     that section shall be performed by such officers, agents, and 
     other persons as may be designated for that purpose by the 
     Secretary of Homeland Security, the Secretary of State, or 
     the Attorney General.

     ``Sec. 1550. Additional jurisdiction

       ``(a) Whoever commits an offense under this chapter within 
     the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the 
     United States shall be punished as provided by that offense.
       ``(b) Whoever commits an offense under this chapter outside 
     the United States shall be punished as provided by that 
     offense if--
       ``(1) the offense involves a United States immigration 
     document (or any document purporting to be the same) or any 
     matter, right, or benefit arising under or authorized by the 
     immigration laws of the United States or the regulations 
     prescribed thereunder; or
       ``(2) the offense is in or affects foreign commerce; or
       ``(3) the offense affects, jeopardizes, or poses a 
     significant risk to the lawful administration of the 
     immigration laws of the United States, or the national 
     security of the United States; or
       ``(4) the offense is committed to facilitate an act of 
     international terrorism (as defined in section 2331 of this 
     title) or a drug trafficking crime (as defined in section 
     929(a) of this title) that affects or would affect the 
     national security of the United States; or
       ``(5) an offender is a national of the United States (as 
     defined in section 101(a)(22) of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. Sec.  1001(a)(22)) or an alien 
     lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United 
     States (as defined in section 101(a)(20) of the Immigration 
     and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. Sec.  1001(a)(20)); or
       ``(6) an offender is a stateless person whose habitual 
     residence is in the United States.

     ``Sec. 1551. Additional venue

       ``An offense under section 1542 of this chapter may be 
     prosecuted in--
       ``(1) any district in which the false statement or 
     representation was made; or
       ``(2) any district in which the passport application was 
     prepared, submitted, mailed, received, processed, or 
     adjudicated; or
       ``(3) in the case of an application prepared and 
     adjudicated outside the United States, in the district in 
     which the resultant passport was produced.

     Nothing in this section limits the venue otherwise available 
     under sections 3237 and 3238 of this title.

     ``Sec. 1552. Definitions

       ``For purposes of this chapter:
       ``(1) The term `falsely make' means to prepare or complete 
     an immigration document with knowledge or in reckless 
     disregard of the fact that the document--
       ``(A) contains a statement or representation that is false, 
     fictitious, or fraudulent;
       ``(B) has no basis in fact or law; or
       ``(C) otherwise fails to state a fact that is material to 
     the purpose for which the document was created, designed, or 
     submitted.
       ``(2) The term a `false statement or representation' 
     includes a personation or an omission.
       ``(3) The term `felony' means any criminal offense 
     punishable by a term of imprisonment of more than 1 year 
     under the laws of the United States, any State, or a foreign 
     government.
       ``(4) The term `immigration document' means--
       ``(A) any passport or visa; or

[[Page 29119]]

       ``(B) any application, petition, affidavit, declaration, 
     attestation, form, identification card, alien registration 
     document, employment authorization document, border crossing 
     card, certificate, permit, order, license, stamp, 
     authorization, grant of authority, or other evidentiary 
     document, arising under or authorized by the immigration laws 
     of the United States.

     Such term includes any document, photograph, or other piece 
     of evidence attached to or submitted in support of an 
     immigration document.
       ``(5) The term `immigration laws' includes--
       ``(A) the laws described in section 101(a)(17) of the 
     Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(17));
       ``(B) the laws relating to the issuance and use of 
     passports; and
       ``(C) the regulations prescribed under the authority of any 
     law described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of this subsection.
       ``(6) A person does not exercise `lawful authority' if the 
     person abuses or improperly exercises lawful authority the 
     person otherwise holds.
       ``(7) The term `passport' means a travel document attesting 
     to the identity and nationality of the bearer that is issued 
     under the authority of the Secretary of State, a foreign 
     government, or an international organization; or any 
     instrument purporting to be the same.
       ``(8) The term `produce' means to make, prepare, assemble, 
     issue, print, authenticate, or alter.
       ``(9) The term `State' means a State of the United States, 
     the District of Columbia, and any commonwealth, territory, or 
     possession of the United States.

     ``Sec. 1553. Authorized law enforcement activities

       ``The sections in this chapter do not prohibit any lawfully 
     authorized investigative, protective, or intelligence 
     activity of a law enforcement agency of the United States, a 
     State, or a subdivision of a State, or of an intelligence 
     agency of the United States, or any activity authorized under 
     title V of the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970 (18 U.S.C. 
     note prec. 3481).''.

     SEC. 213. CRIMINAL DETENTION OF ALIENS.

       (a) Section 3142(e) of title 18, United States Code, is 
     amended by inserting at the end the following:
      ``Subject to rebuttal by the person, it shall be presumed 
     that no condition or combination of conditions will 
     reasonably assure the appearance of the person as required if 
     the judicial officer finds that there is probable cause to 
     believe that the person is an alien and that the person--
       ``(1) has no lawful immigration status in the United 
     States;
       ``(2) is the subject of a final order of removal; or
       ``(3) has committed a felony offense under section 911, 
     922(g)(5), 1015, 1028, 1425, or 1426 of this title, or any 
     section of chapters 75 and 77 of this title, or section 243, 
     274, 275, 276, 277, or 278, of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act.''.
       (b) Section 3142(g)(3) of title 18, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (A) 
     and by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(C) the person's immigration status; and''.

     SEC. 214. UNIFORM STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS FOR CERTAIN 
                   IMMIGRATION, NATURALIZATION, AND PEONAGE 
                   OFFENSES.

       Section 3291 of title 18, United States Code, is amended to 
     read as follows:

     ``SEC. 3291. IMMIGRATION, NATURALIZATION, AND PEONAGE 
                   OFFENSES.

       ``No person shall be prosecuted, tried, or punished for a 
     violation of any section of chapters 69 (relating to 
     nationality and citizenship offenses), 75 (relating to 
     passport, visa, and immigration offenses), or 77 (relating to 
     peonage, slavery, and trafficking in persons) of this title 
     (or for attempt or conspiracy to violate any such section), 
     or for a violation of any criminal provision of sections 243, 
     266, 274, 275, 276, 277, or 278 of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act (or for attempt or conspiracy to violate any 
     such section), unless the indictment is returned or the 
     information filed within ten years after the commission of 
     the offense.''.

     SEC. 215. CONFORMING AMENDMENT.

       Subparagraph (P) of section 101(a)(43) of the Immigration 
     and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``(i) which either is falsely making, 
     forging, counterfeiting, mutilating, or altering a passport 
     or instrument in violation of section 1543 of Title 18 or is 
     described in section 1546(a) of such title (relating to 
     document fraud) and (ii)'' and inserting ``which is described 
     in any section of chapter 75 of title 18, United States 
     Code,''; and
       (2) by inserting after ``first offense'' the following: 
     ``(i) that is not described in section 1548 (relating to 
     increased penalties), and (ii)''.

     SEC. 216. INADMISSIBILITY FOR PASSPORT AND IMMIGRATION FRAUD.

       (a) In General.--Section 212(a)(2)(A)(i) of the Immigration 
     and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(2)(A)(i)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``or'' at the end of subclause (I);
       (2) by inserting ``or'' at the end of subclause (II); and
       (3) by inserting the following new subparagraph:

       ``(III) a violation of (or a conspiracy or attempt to 
     violate) any section of chapter 75 of title 18, United States 
     Code,''.

       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) 
     shall apply to proceedings pending on or after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 217. REMOVAL FOR PASSPORT AND IMMIGRATION FRAUD.

       (a) In General.--Clause (iii) of section 237(a)(3)(B) of 
     the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.1227(a)(3)(B)) 
     is amended to read as follows ``(iii) of a violation of, or 
     an attempt or a conspiracy to violate, any section of chapter 
     75 of title 18, United States Code,''.
       (b) Effective Date.--This amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall apply to proceedings pending on or after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act
       In section 301--
       (1) in subsection (b), in the matter preceding paragraph 
     (1), strike ``Congress'' and insert ``appropriate 
     congressional committees (as defined in section 102(g))''; 
     and
       (2) in subsection (c), strike ``Rule of Construction'' and 
     insert ``Rules of Construction'', insert ``(1)'' before 
     ``Nothing'' and add at the end the following new paragraph:
       (2) Nothing in this section shall be construed to alter, 
     impact, diminish, or in any way undermine the authority of 
     the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration to 
     oversee, regulate, and control the safe and efficient use of 
     the airspace of the United States.
       In section 305(a), in the matter before paragraph (1), 
     strike ``any activity'' and insert ``any terrorism prevention 
     or deterrence activity''.
       At the end of title III, add the following new section:

     SEC. 308. RED ZONE DEFENSE BORDER INTELLIGENCE PILOT PROGRAM.

       (a) Establishment.--The Secretary of Homeland Security and 
     the Director of National Intelligence shall jointly establish 
     a pilot program to improve the coordination and management of 
     intelligence and homeland security information provided to or 
     utilized by the Department of Homeland Security relating to 
     the southwest international land and maritime border of the 
     United States.
       (b) Pilot Area.--The Secretary of Homeland Security and the 
     Director of National Intelligence shall designate a 
     geographic area along the southwest international land and 
     maritime border of the United States centered on Cochise 
     County, Arizona, to be the pilot area for the pilot program 
     established pursuant to subsection (a).
       (c) Program.--The pilot program established pursuant to 
     subsection (a) shall--
       (1) coordinate and facilitate the sharing of intelligence 
     and homeland security information related to border security 
     within the pilot area designated pursuant to subsection (b) 
     among Federal, State, local, and tribal governments, 
     including relevant intelligence and homeland security 
     information provided to the Department of Homeland Security 
     by the intelligence community and relevant intelligence and 
     homeland security information gathered by the Department of 
     Homeland Security from other sources;
       (2) to the maximum extent possible, provide for persistent 
     surveillance of such pilot area;
       (3) to the maximum extent possible, utilize airships, 
     aerostats, and existing unmanned aerial vehicles to provide 
     for surveillance of such pilot area;
       (4) to the maximum extent possible, fully utilize the 
     capabilities of underutilized assets currently available to 
     conduct surveillance of such pilot area;
       (5) where practicable, utilize the capabilities of existing 
     operational and analytical centers that analyze intelligence 
     and homeland security information relating to such pilot area 
     from multiple sources and improve the interoperability of 
     such centers;
       (6) consistent with applicable security requirements, 
     disseminate actionable intelligence and homeland security 
     information relating to border security within such pilot 
     area to the appropriate Federal, State, local, tribal, and 
     foreign governments to support operational activities 
     relating to border security within such pilot area;
       (7) provide for direct transmission of such actionable 
     intelligence and homeland security information to operational 
     and analytical centers included in the pilot program;
       (8) provide for a representative of the Department of 
     Homeland Security to be assigned to each operational and 
     analytical center to facilitate the immediate utilization, 
     where practicable, of such actionable intelligence and 
     homeland security information; and
       (9) develop metrics to assess the capability of such pilot 
     program to improve border security.
       (d) Strategy Coordination.--In establishing the pilot 
     program under subsection (a), the Director of National 
     Intelligence shall coordinate the intelligence activities of 
     the pilot program with the relevant activities and programs 
     of other elements of the intelligence community.

[[Page 29120]]

       (e) Headquarters.--The Secretary of Homeland Security and 
     the Director of National Intelligence may establish a 
     headquarters for the pilot program established pursuant to 
     subsection (a) within the area designated as the pilot area 
     pursuant to subsection (b).
       (f) Duration.--The pilot program established pursuant to 
     subsection (a) shall last a minimum of two years.
       (g) Report.--Not later than one year after the 
     establishment of the pilot program pursuant to subsection 
     (a), the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Director of 
     National Intelligence shall submit to Congress a report 
     containing--
       (1) the lessons learned from such pilot program based on 
     the metrics developed pursuant to subsection (c)(9);
       (2) recommendations for enhancing the provision and sharing 
     of intelligence and homeland security information relating to 
     border security under the National Strategy for Border 
     Security submitted pursuant to section 102(b) and with other 
     programs of the intelligence community relating to border 
     security; and
       (3) an identification of any provisions of law that may 
     impede effective coordination of intelligence and homeland 
     security information relating to the southwest international 
     land and maritime border of the United States.
       (h) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Homeland security information.--The term ``homeland 
     security information'' has the meaning given the term in 
     section 892(f)(1) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 
     U.S.C. 482(f)(1)).
       (2) Intelligence community.--The term ``intelligence 
     community'' has the meaning given the term in section 3(4) of 
     the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 401a(4)).
       (i) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out 
     this section .
       In section 401(c), add at the end the following paragraph:
       (3) Discretion.--Nothing in this section shall be construed 
     as limiting the authority of the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security, in the Secretary's sole unreviewable discretion, to 
     determine whether an alien described in clause (ii) of 
     section 235(b)(1)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act 
     shall be detained or released after a finding of a credible 
     fear of persecution (as defined in clause (v) of such 
     section).
       In section 431(e) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, as 
     added by section 502(a), insert ``the Department of 
     Transportation,'' after ``Justice,''.
       Amend clause (vi) of section 601(a)(1)(B) to read as 
     follows:

       (vi) by striking the last sentence and inserting the 
     following: ``The Secretary of Homeland Security shall waive 
     the application of clause (v) in the case of removal of an 
     alien who is a native or citizen of a country in the Western 
     Hemisphere with whose government the United States does not 
     have full diplomatic relations.
       In section 602(a)--
       (1) in section 241(a)(8) of the Immigration and Nationality 
     Act, inserted by paragraph (8)
       (A) strike ``procedures described'' and insert ``rules set 
     forth''; and
       (B) strike the dash and ``(A)'' and strike ``, and'' and 
     all that follows up to the period at the end; and
       (2) in section 241(j) of such Act, inserted by paragraph 
     (9)--
       (A) in paragraph (1), strike ``procedures described'' and 
     insert ``rules set forth'';
       (B) in paragraph (3)(B)(i) strike ``subparagraph (A) if'' 
     and all the follows through ``apply.'' and insert the 
     following:
       `` subparagraph (A)--

       ``(I) until the alien is removed if the conditions 
     described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (4) apply; 
     or
       ``(II) pending a determination as provided in subparagraph 
     (C) of paragraph (4).''

       In section 241(j)(3)(B)(ii) of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act, inserted by section 602(a)(9), strike `` 
     paragraph (4)(A)'' and insert ``paragraph (4)(B)''.
       In section 611--
       (1) strike ``section 103(d)(1)'' and insert ``sections 
     103(d)(1) and 105(a)(2)(A)''; and
       (2) strike ``is amended'' and insert ``are each amended''.
       Add at the end of title VI, the following new sections:

     SEC. 615. REPORT ON CRIMINAL ALIEN PROSECUTION.

       Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act and annually thereafter, the Attorney General shall 
     submit to the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on the Judiciary of the 
     Senate a report on the status of criminal alien prosecutions, 
     including prosecutions of human smugglers.

     SEC. 616. DETERMINATION OF IMMIGRATION STATUS OF INDIVIDUALS 
                   CHARGED WITH FEDERAL OFFENSES.

       (a) Responsibility of United States Attorneys.--Beginning 2 
     years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the office 
     of the United States attorney that is prosecuting a criminal 
     case in a Federal court--
       (1) shall determine, not later than 30 days after filing 
     the initial pleadings in the case, whether each defendant in 
     the case is lawfully present in the United States (subject to 
     subsequent legal proceedings to determine otherwise);
       (2)(A) if the defendant is determined to be an alien 
     lawfully present in the United States, shall notify the court 
     in writing of the determination and the current status of the 
     alien under the Immigration and Nationality Act; and
       (B) if the defendant is determined not to be lawfully 
     present in the United States, shall notify the court in 
     writing of the determination, the defendant's alien status, 
     and, to the extent possible, the country of origin or legal 
     residence of the defendant; and
       (3) ensure that the information described in paragraph (2) 
     is included in the case file and the criminal records system 
     of the office of the United States attorney.

     The determination under paragraph (1) shall be made in 
     accordance with guidelines of the Executive Office for 
     Immigration Review of the Department of Justice.
       (b) Responsibilities of Federal Courts.--
       (1) Modifications of records and case managements 
     systems.--Not later than 2 years after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, all Federal courts that hear criminal 
     cases, or appeals of criminal cases, shall modify their 
     criminal records and case management systems, in accordance 
     with guidelines which the Director of the Administrative 
     Office of the United States Courts shall establish, so as to 
     enable accurate reporting of information described in 
     paragraph (2) of subsection (a).
       (2) Data entries.--Beginning 2 years after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, each Federal court described in 
     paragraph (1) shall enter into its electronic records the 
     information contained in each notification to the court under 
     subsection (a)(2).
       (c) Annual Report to Congress.--The Director of the 
     Administrative Office of the United States Courts shall 
     include, in the annual report filed with the Congress under 
     section 604 of title 28, United States Code--
       (1) statistical information on criminal trials of aliens in 
     the courts and criminal convictions of aliens in the lower 
     courts and upheld on appeal, including the type of crime in 
     each case and including information on the legal status of 
     the aliens; and
       (2) recommendations on whether additional court resources 
     are needed to accommodate the volume of criminal cases 
     brought against aliens in the Federal courts.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated for each of fiscal years 2007 through 
     2012, such sums as may be necessary to carry out this Act. 
     Funds appropriated pursuant to this subsection in any fiscal 
     year shall remain available until expended.
       In section 274A(h)(4) of the Immigration and Nationality 
     Act, as added by section 705--

       (1) amend the heading to read: ``RECRUITMENT AND 
     REFERRAL'';
       (2) amend the third sentence to read as follows: ``However, 
     labor service agencies, whether public, private, for-profit, 
     or nonprofit, that refer, dispatch, or otherwise facilitate 
     the hiring of workers for any period of time by a third party 
     are included in the definition whether or not they receive 
     remuneration.'' ; and
       (3) amend the sixth sentence to read as follows: ``However, 
     labor service agencies, whether public, private, for-profit, 
     or nonprofit, that refer, dispatch, or otherwise facilitate 
     the hiring of workers for any period of time by a third party 
     are included in the definition whether or not they receive 
     remuneration.''.
       Redesignate section 708 as 709, and insert after section 
     707 the following new section:

     SEC. 708. EXTENSION OF PREEMPTION TO REQUIRED CONSTRUCTION OF 
                   DAY LABORER SHELTERS.

        Paragraph 274A(h)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality 
     Act (8 U.S.C. 1324a(h)(2)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``imposing'', and inserting a dash and 
     ``(A) imposing'';
       (2) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``; 
     and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(B) Requiring as a condition of conducting, continuing, 
     or expanding a business that a business entity--
       ``(i) provide, build, fund, or maintain a shelter, 
     structure, or designated area for use by day laborers at or 
     near its place of business; or
       ``(ii) take other steps that facilitate the employment of 
     day laborers by others.''.
       At the end of title VIII add the following:

     SEC. 807. CLARIFICATION OF JURISDICTION ON REVIEW.

       (a) Review of Discretionary Determinations.--Section 
     242(a)(2)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 
     1252(a)(2)(B)) is amended--
       (1) by inserting before ``no court'' the following: ``and 
     regardless of whether the individual determination, decision, 
     or action is made in removal proceedings,'';
       (2) in clause (i), by striking ``any judgment'' and 
     inserting ``any individual determination''; and
       (3) in clause (ii)--
       (A) by inserting ``discretionary'' after ``any other'';

[[Page 29121]]

       (B) by striking ``the authority for which is specified 
     under this title to be in the discretion of the Attorney 
     General or the Secretary of Homeland Security,'' and 
     inserting ``under this title or the regulations promulgated 
     hereunder,''; and
       (C) by striking the period at the end and inserting the 
     following: ``, irrespective of whether such decision or 
     action is guided or informed by standards, regulatory or 
     otherwise.''.
       (b) Review of Orders Against Criminal Aliens.--Section 
     242(a)(2)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 
     1252(a)(2)(C)) is amended by inserting after ``of removal'' 
     the following: ``(irrespective of whether relief or 
     protection was denied on the basis of the alien's having 
     committed a criminal offense)''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to petitions for review that are pending on or 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 808. FEES AND EXPENSES IN JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS.

       (a) In General.--Section 242 of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1252) is amended by adding at the 
     end the following new subsection:
       ``(i) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a court 
     shall not award fees or other expenses to an alien based upon 
     the alien's status as a prevailing party in any proceedings 
     relating to an order of removal issued under this Act, unless 
     the court of appeals concludes that the Attorney General's 
     determination that the alien was removable under section 212 
     or 237 was not substantially justified.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall apply to fees or other expenses awarded on or after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 621, the gentleman 
from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 
Conyers) each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Chairman, for purposes of clarification, before I summarize the 
provisions within the manager's amendment, I will highlight what the 
amendment does not contain.
  The amendment does not contain a sense of Congress on foreign 
workers; nor does it decrease the criminal penalties for illegal entry 
and illegal presence. The latter issue will be addressed in a separate 
amendment I will soon offer.
  I will now summarize the provisions of the manager's amendment within 
the jurisdiction of the Judiciary Committee.
  First, the amendment contains a provision drafted by the gentleman 
from Utah (Mr. Cannon) that will prohibit localities from requiring 
businesses to set up day labor sites as a condition for conducting or 
expanding a business. No business should be compelled to facilitate the 
hiring of illegal aliens by establishing labor sites on or near their 
premises, and this amendment will prohibit this practice.
  The amendment also contains a provision drafted by the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Issa) that requires the Attorney General to report on 
the status of criminal alien prosecutions, including prosecutions of 
smugglers. Mr. Issa is rightly concerned about the lack of sufficient 
prosecutions of alien smugglers who prey upon the most vulnerable.
  The amendment also includes a number of important provisions that 
will facilitate the ability of the Departments of Justice and Homeland 
Security to combat illegal immigration. Specifically, the amendment 
sets mandatory minimum sentences for repeated marriage fraud; improved 
sentencing enhancements for aliens who enter illegally after criminal 
convictions; clarifies that the Board of Immigration Appeals' decisions 
on motions to reopen removal proceedings are not subject to judicial 
review; increases penalties for passport and immigration fraud and 
penalizes fraud against aliens applying for immigration benefits; makes 
criminal defendants' immigration status an express consideration in 
determining whether they should be released on bond; extends the 
statute of limitations for all immigration-related fraud; makes 
passport fraud a ground of inadmissibility and deportability; and 
abolishes attorneys' fee awards to removable aliens under the Equal 
Access to Justice Act.

                              {time}  1545

  Madam Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CONYERS. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Chairman, we come to the floor with a 39-page manager's 
amendment that has never been considered in the committee during the 
rather lengthy number of times that we have held hearings at the 
subcommittee and full committee level. And while there are fortunately 
some parts of it that I can agree to, I have counted approximately nine 
parts of it that present very serious problems.
  One is that the punishment does not fit the crime. The manager's 
amendment would expand the definition of aggravated felony to include a 
wide range of passport and related document offenses, even if the 
person never spent a day in jail. As I have previously stated, the 
consequences of an aggravated felony conviction are severe. They 
include, among other things, mandatory detention, permanent deportation 
and ineligibility for any type of relief. And so I think that is a very 
serious criticism. It criminalizes the most vulnerable of our 
populations.
  This manager's amendment, with regard to passport fraud, would 
criminalize trafficking victims, victims of domestic violence or abuse, 
victims of animals, coyotes, and others who often do not have control 
over what documents are presented to immigration officials on their 
behalf.
  Madam Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Berman), a member of the committee.
  Mr. BERMAN. Madam Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
this time, and I would ask the chairman to consider one specific thing 
about one very discrete narrow part of the manager's amendment.
  In the fantasy world we are in, should this bill ever actually become 
a law, the issue on the passport violations that the gentleman from 
Michigan just spoke to, there are limited situations where someone that 
you and I and everyone around would agree truly was a refugee, with a 
well-founded fear of persecution, escaping from a politically 
repressive regime took advantage of some kind of falsified and altered 
passport in order to escape.
  The only question I have, as we look at the manager's amendment now, 
there should be some discretion here in the context of either 
criminalizing or deportation to allow a situation where that was the 
purpose; the person met the full test of a refugee and that that not 
become a basis for deporting him or her back to the regime or 
incarcerating that person or charging them with a criminal offense.
  Mr. CONYERS. Madam Chairman, I would be pleased to yield 30 seconds 
to the chairman of the committee.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding 
me this time.
  First, on the hypothetical the gentleman from California raised, 
there is this thing called prosecutorial discretion. It seems to me we 
should have more faith in our prosecutors not to prosecute genuine 
refugees, but continue the law on the books as proposed in the 
manager's amendment that will get at the people who use passport fraud 
to cover the transportation of a lot of people who are not refugees and 
who should not enter the United States.
  Mr. CONYERS. Madam Chairman, I yield 15 seconds to the gentleman from 
California.
  Mr. BERMAN. Madam Chairman, I felt that answer was not totally 
satisfactory from my point of view.
  Would somewhere in the context of the language of that provision or 
the report language indicate that it is not our intent in that 
situation, with your classic refugee purpose?
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds to say 
that, should this matter survive conference, there will be a statement 
that it is not intended to include the situation in the statement on 
the part of the managers. And I can say, as the floor manager of this 
bill and the author of the manager's amendment, it does not either.

[[Page 29122]]

  Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CONYERS. Madam Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  The other point that we would like to make, and there are so many, 
but the manager's amendment punishes amazingly battered immigrant women 
who would suffer some very harsh consequences when they are frequently 
forced by their batterers to use fraudulent travel documents.
  Under the Violence Against Women Act, battered immigrants are 
entitled to self-petition for immigration status, independent of their 
abusive U.S. citizen and lawful permanent residence spouse. So this 
would be a huge step backwards for those of us who have been working in 
this area.
  So I urge and I hope that because there has been insufficient 
attention given in the committee and since we did not know these were 
going to come up, that the manager's amendment will be turned back and 
that we be given an opportunity to examine this more than a dozen 
objections that we raise.
  Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mrs. Emerson). The question is on the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner).
  The amendment was agreed to.


            Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Price of Georgia

  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

  Amendment No. 5 printed in House Report 109-350 offered by Mr. Price 
of Georgia:
       In section 101(a), in the matter preceding paragraph (1), 
     strike ``The Secretary'' insert ``Not later than 18 months 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary''.
       In section 101(b), strike ``the entry into the United 
     States of'' and insert ``all unlawful entries into the United 
     States, including entries by''.
       In section 101, add at the end the following new 
     subsection:
       (c) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act and annually thereafter, the Secretary 
     shall submit to Congress a report on the progress made toward 
     achieving and maintaining operational control over the entire 
     international land and maritime borders of the United States 
     in accordance with this section.
       In section 102(b), insert after paragraph (3) the following 
     new paragraph (and redesignate subsequent paragraphs 
     accordingly):
       (4) An assessment of all legal requirements that prevent 
     achieving and maintaining operational control over the entire 
     international land and maritime borders of the United States.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 621, the gentleman 
from Georgia (Mr. Price) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I want to thank the Speaker, Chairman King, Chairman Sensenbrenner, 
the Homeland Security Committee, the Judiciary and Rules Committee, and 
their staffs, for their wonderful help in the preparation of this 
amendment and, frankly, for this debate and bringing this issue 
forward.
  Based on my experience in representing Georgians in both the State 
Senate and in Congress, this chamber is now dealing with the issue of 
immigration reform and border security because the American people are 
demanding it. Recent public opinion polling confirms what we all know, 
and that is that illegal immigration is as important as other major 
issues, including the war on terror and the economy.
  Such overwhelming support for border security and immigration reform 
is due to a general sense and knowledge that our current policy is one 
of benign neglect. An estimated 12 to 20 million illegal aliens live 
here, and the presence of so many illegal aliens undermines our rule of 
law.
  Today, the people's body is heeding the will of the American people. 
Many of the ideas introduced by Members of the House, in fact, reflect 
very specific concerns of their constituents, and I believe that my 
amendment is one of those that properly reflects the voice of the 
populace.
  This amendment sets a hard deadline, a specific date of 18 months 
following adoption of the legislation to achieve complete operational 
control over our borders. In addition, it would clarify the working 
definition of operational control of our border to include the 
prevention of all unlawful entries into the United States.
  My amendment is a critical component to the border security debate 
because it provides the accountability portion, and it signifies to the 
American people that there will be no more excuses. Illegal entries 
into the United States will not be tolerated because our Nation is not 
secure unless our borders are secure.
  Instead of kicking the problem down the road just a little bit, the 
Federal Government is given the specific goal to get the current crisis 
under control. This is called accountability, something that we say we 
all want from government. A hard deadline holds the executive branch, 
Congress and the bureaucracy accountable.
  The House leadership, the Judiciary Committee and the Homeland 
Security Committee should be praised for their efforts. Stopping the 
influx of illegal aliens begins with solid border security and interior 
enforcement, and we are finally addressing the crisis that so many of 
our constituents rightfully believe to be of paramount importance.
  I respectfully ask my colleagues to support this amendment of 
accountability.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time on this side, 
although I am not opposed to the amendment of the gentleman from 
Georgia.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mr. Hayes). Without objection, the gentleman is 
recognized.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I think our colleague from Georgia has an excellent 
amendment, but I think his deadline may be too generous. The Department 
of Homeland Security should report to Congress on the progress it is 
making to secure our borders, but, unfortunately, they have an 
unenviable record of submitting their reports to the Congress. Our 
ranking member of the Homeland Security Committee has written Secretary 
Chertoff twice on the repeated failures of the Department of Homeland 
Security to meet congressionally mandated deadlines.
  As you have stated, we have a duty to ensure that it is protecting 
the American people, and to do that we must receive information to 
ensure that the Department is up to the task. Every day that passes in 
which Congress does not receive this information is another day that 
the terrorists gain on us if they are planning the next attack.
  So I support the amendment of the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price), 
which gives the Homeland Security Department a lot of time, but I think 
we want to ride a very careful herd over these fellows in terms of 
where they go from this amendment.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. CONYERS. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment, 
and I think we ought to talk about what operational control means.
  Under the amendment, it means the prevention of all unlawful entries 
into the United States, including by terrorists and illegal aliens, and 
including all narcotics shipments.
  The amendment also provides that, within 90 days of enactment, the 
Department of Homeland Security provides the Congress a comprehensive 
plan for border surveillance and, within 180 days, DHS provides to 
Congress a national strategy for border security and a report on 
progress made.

                              {time}  1600

  Now these goals are obviously ambitious and the Department of 
Homeland Security has not been ambitious on anything, in my opinion; 
but it seems to me by setting deadlines, and then

[[Page 29123]]

the two committees in their oversight functions can be on the back of 
the Department of Homeland Security, and we might shame them into doing 
the right thing.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, we have had a lot of 
time here with the current administration to have ridden herd and call 
for an accounting. I think the gentleman from Georgia is forced, and we 
are all collectively forced, into this position. They have had plenty 
of time to have been far more compliant.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) for making his 
points, because I agree: our responsibility as a Congress is truly 
oversight. It concerns me greatly that we do not get many of the 
reports that we are due. I look forward to working with him and holding 
the Department of Homeland Security's feet to the fire.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Culberson).
  Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this 
amendment as well as the underlying legislation because its focus is 
law enforcement, and this is a law enforcement and a national security 
issue. In controlling our borders, we will win the war on terror only 
when we control our borders, and it is important that the country 
recognize that northern Mexico has become like Colombia, owned lock, 
stock and barrel by the drug lords whose law is ``plata o plomo,'' 
silver or lead. You work in my plaza, you pay me silver or I will kill 
you now with lead, plomo; and we must have the rule of law and order on 
the border and not the rule of plata o plomo.
  The chairman has rightly focused this legislation on reestablishing 
law and order on the border, and I applaud the gentleman from Georgia 
for his amendment so we can keep the Department of Homeland Security 
focused on giving us in Congress the information we need so we can 
determine whether or not the United States is properly protecting its 
border at a time when we are at war with terrorists who have told us 
repeatedly that they are going to sneak into the country using whatever 
means are necessary to hurt us. I urge all Members to support this 
amendment and the underlying bill.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Berman).
  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time, and I do not oppose the amendment. In fact, I think it should be 
labeled from ``our lips to God's ears.''
  If we say that by a certain date we will stop and Homeland Security 
will stop, using the chairman's definition, will have operational 
control so that no terrorists, no illegal aliens, no drug smugglers 
ever come into our country; if we say that and we say it strong enough, 
then maybe it will happen.
  And after we do that, I suggest a bill that says that by a certain 
date we eliminate poverty, and pass that, and a few other very 
important goals that I think we all share here.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  This is a simple amendment regarding accountability, and I am 
privileged to have the opportunity to offer it. We say that we want 
accountability in this and other areas. Those charged with securing our 
borders should be held accountable as well. I urge adoption of the 
amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, we support the Price amendment, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting Chairman (Mr. Hayes). The question is on the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Stearns

  Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 6 printed in House Report 109-350 offered by 
     Mr. Stearns:
       At the end of title I, add the following:

     SEC. 118. COMPLETION OF BACKGROUND AND SECURITY CHECKS.

       Section 103 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 
     U.S.C. 1103) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(i) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     Secretary of Homeland Security, the Attorney General, and the 
     courts may not--
       ``(1) grant or order the grant of adjustment of status of 
     an alien to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent 
     residence,
       ``(2) grant or order the grant of any other status, relief, 
     protection from removal, or other benefit under the 
     immigration laws, or
       ``(3) issue any documentation evidencing or related to such 
     grant by the Secretary, the Attorney General, or any court,

     until an IBIS check on the alien has been initiated at a 
     Treasury Enforcement Communications System (TECS) access 
     level of no less than Level 3, results from the check have 
     been returned, and any derogatory information has been 
     obtained and assessed, and until any other such background 
     and security checks have been completed as the Secretary may 
     require.
       ``(j) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     Secretary of Homeland Security, the Attorney General, and the 
     courts may not--
       ``(1) grant or order the grant of adjustment of status of 
     an alien to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent 
     residence,
       ``(2) grant or order the grant of any other status, relief, 
     protection from removal, or other benefit under the 
     immigration laws, or
       ``(3) issue any documentation evidencing or related to such 
     grant by the Secretary, the Attorney General, or any court,

     until any suspected or alleged fraud relating to the granting 
     of any status (including the granting of adjustment of 
     status), relief, protection from removal, or other benefit 
     under this subsection has been fully investigated and found 
     to be unsubstantiated.''.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 621, the gentleman 
from Florida (Mr. Stearns) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, obviously, I would like to thank the Rules Committee 
publicly for allowing my amendment because I know there were probably 
130 amendments, and I know they had a tough job deciding which ones to 
allow to go forward.
  In short, my amendment requires our government to ensure that the 
applicant is not a known criminal or terrorist before granting them 
immigration benefits. Pretty simple. But as the current law now stands, 
background checks of alien applicants are required, but the law does 
not specifically require these security checks to be completed before 
these immigration benefits are actually handed out.
  This means that many unworthy people have been able to receive these 
crucial benefits which then enables them to move freely throughout our 
country before their background checks are completely finished. By the 
time we finally discover something questionable in their background, of 
course it is too late to track them down. We cannot find them.
  My amendment helps to close this loophole. My amendment will prohibit 
the Department of Homeland Security, the Attorney General, and all 
courts from granting any kind of legal immigration status or benefits 
to an alien until, at a minimum, the alien's name is first completely 
checked against a database of criminal records and terrorist watch 
lists using the Treasury Enforcement Communication System database.
  As it now stands, all three have been giving status to aliens before 
they get their final results back from security checks. The result is 
we are giving green cards, citizenship, work permits, and temporary 
status to terrorists, criminals, and other unsavory types under this 
arrangement, not always but sometimes.
  For example, a new study by Janice Kephart, who was on the staff of 
the 9/11 Commission, looked at the immigration histories of 94 
terrorists, including six of the 9/11 hijackers who had operated on 
U.S. soil between the 1990s and 2004. The results of this study are 
quite frightening. Two-thirds, that is 59, of the foreign-born 
terrorists studied

[[Page 29124]]

committed immigration benefits fraud prior to or in conjunction with 
taking part in terrorist activity.
  My amendment should go a long way towards preventing this 
irresponsible and dangerous loophole. I urge my colleagues to support 
my amendment and the underlying bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I am not in opposition, but I would like to 
claim the time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman is recognized.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I congratulate and agree with the notion that no 
immigration benefit should be given to any alien until all relevant 
background and security checks have been completed and any suspected 
fraud related to the granting of such status or benefit has been fully 
investigated and found to be unsubstantiated.
  The gentleman from Florida is right. He has said in the context of 
his comments for this amendment that he believes that is happening now, 
and he may be right. I do not know that it is not. But all I know is 
that for my congressional office and for my colleagues' congressional 
offices, every time our staffs call regarding the processing of an 
immigration application, we hear there is nothing we can do. We are 
waiting for the FBI to get an answer. Why the FBI is just choosing the 
cases our congressional offices do, to hold back on providing 
information and denying immigration benefits, I do not know. In other 
words, what you say and what you ask for is correct, but the problem is 
not so much with the immigrant. The problem is with the bureaucracy.
  The resources, the leadership to get these terrorist lists, these 
watch lists, the criminal database up to date so we can get this 
information in a quick time is very important.
  I would just like to tell a quick story about the NSEERS program in 
Los Angeles. They had a registration date for different countries. If 
you are here from Iran on a nonimmigrant visa, come in on such and such 
date and register. People did that. Huge numbers of people flocked into 
the Los Angeles office of INS to do that.
  The FBI was totally unable to give any clearance to the people who 
were coming in. Huge numbers of people were held, detained and kept 
overnight over a weekend thinking they were just going to file a 
registration form because the FBI could not get the clearance. That is 
a scandalous way to treated a number of people who came here as 
refugees fleeing the tyranny of the ayatollah because our bureaucracy 
failed to provide the answers.
  So to me the answer here in Homeland Security and the FBI and in the 
other critical agencies is to get these lists and this other critical 
information online and accurate and quick so that we can move ahead 
with legitimate requests for these benefits that should be conditioned 
on getting that information out.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), the chairman of the full Committee on 
the Judiciary.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment. 
This amendment has been triggered by a recent IG report of the 
Department of Homeland Security that not all applicants for immigration 
benefits undertake an IBIS check. The excuse that was given is that not 
all U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service employees have a high 
enough security clearance to conduct the proper checks, and some of the 
problems stem from simple lax management. Neither of these excuses is 
valid.
  I am amazed that this has not always been a requirement of the law. 
We should conduct a thorough background check of anybody who seeks 
immigration benefits. The necessity of these checks was demonstrated by 
the fact that at least six of the 9/11 hijackers, murderers, ended up 
slipping through the cracks. I think this amendment plugs an important 
loophole in the current law, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Chairman, the distinguished chairman of the Judiciary Committee 
used the word ``amazed,'' and I am just amazed, too, that this 
amendment would even be needed at this point.
  The gentleman on the other side of the aisle has talked about the 
resources, but we cannot even talk about the resources until we 
implement the procedures. And so to get this procedure in place will 
then determine if we have the resources and we can take the next step. 
But I appreciate his example and his support.
  I think it can be done and should be done; and before we give these 
benefits, we should be sure these people are who they say they are. It 
is the right thing to do.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the 
ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Stearns) will be postponed.


              Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. Sensenbrenner

  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 7 printed in House Report 109-350 offered by 
     Mr. Sensenbrenner:
  In section 203(2), add ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (B), strike 
``and'' at the end of subparagraph (C), and strike subparagraph (D).

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 621, the gentleman 
from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) and the gentlewoman from California 
(Ms. Zoe Lofgren) each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. 
Sensenbrenner).
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, under current law, illegal entry into the United States 
makes an alien subject to a Federal criminal misdemeanor with a maximum 
penalty of 6 months in prison. However, unlawful presence itself, such 
as by overstaying a visa, is not a criminal offense, but only a civil 
ground of inadmissibility.
  Forty percent of the current illegal alien population entered 
legally, but overstayed their visas. The other 60 percent of the 
illegal alien population came here by illegal means and are therefore 
already subject to criminal penalties for committing a Federal criminal 
offense.
  At the administration's request, the base bill makes unlawful 
presence a crime, such as unlawful entry already is. This change makes 
sense. Aliens who have disregarded our laws by overstaying their visas 
to remain in the United States illegally should be just as culpable as 
aliens who have broken our laws to enter and remain here illegally.
  In the base bill, the maximum penalty for illegal entry was increased 
to a year and a day, and the same penalty was set for unlawful 
presence, to make the enhancements for these offenses consistent with 
the other penalty enhancements of the bill.

                              {time}  1615

  The administration subsequently requested the penalty for these 
crimes be lowered to 6 months. Making the first offense a felony, as 
the base bill would do, would require a grand jury indictment, a trial 
before a district court judge and a jury trial.
  Also because it is a felony, the defendant would be able to get a 
lawyer at public expense if the defendant could not afford the lawyer. 
These requirements would mean that the government would seldom if ever 
actually

[[Page 29125]]

use the new penalties. By leaving these offenses as misdemeanors, more 
prosecutions are likely to be brought against those aliens whose cases 
merit criminal prosecution.
  For this reason, the amendment returns the sentence for illegal entry 
to its current 6 months and sets the penalty for unlawful presence at 
the same level. Some have argued that this provision would require 11 
million prosecutions. That is not true. Prosecutorial resources are 
limited, and authorities would rather quickly deport an alien whose 
only offense is to be here unlawfully rather than to prosecute and have 
to detain that alien pending trial.
  Even if an alien were prosecuted under this provision, a conviction 
of unlawful presence would not prevent an alien from some day attaining 
legal status or even citizenship if the alien would otherwise qualify.
  Making unlawful presence a crime, however, would serve as a greater 
deterrence to aliens overstaying their visas. For these reasons, I ask 
that the Members support this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time 
as I may consume. Currently, illegal presence in the United States is 
not a crime; it is a civil violation.
  People who cross the border without inspection commit a crime for 
improper entry but not an ongoing violation. The government can 
prosecute you for crossing but not for existing after having done so.
  This section, section 203, makes virtually any violation of the 
immigration laws an ongoing criminal act. In one stroke, it would 
subject the entire undocumented population, estimate by some to be 11 
million people, to criminal liability.
  Now the amendment before us changes the degree of punishment, but it 
does not alter the underlying issue of criminalizing being alive in the 
country without documents. I would like to note that, in addition to 
adults, this would criminalize children who had no decision about 
coming to the United States.
  I understand, although, I was not present in the course of the 
discussion in the Rules Committee, but that one of the Members of the 
committee raised the issue of an individual, a young student who was 
17, who actually thought that he was an American citizen and found out, 
much to his surprise, that he was not.
  That young man, under the underlying bill, would be a felon. Under 
the amendment, he would be a misdemeanant, but in fact, he is not a 
criminal at all. He is a kid who was brought here by his parents and 
who is in a bind right now. Making him a criminal is not going to make 
us any safer. It is not a reasonable thing to do. I oppose the 
amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I regret to say, the gentlewoman from California, whom 
I greatly respect, is wrong. Under the Federal juvenile statute, 
children cannot be prosecuted for any Federal crime, felony or 
misdemeanor, if it is not a crime of violence or a drug trafficking 
crime.
  So her entire argument about making children subjected to Federal 
criminal prosecution simply by being here is not valid. They can be 
subjected if it is a crime of violence or a drug trafficking crime. 
What this amendment does is reduce the penalties for this type of 
immigration violation from a felony in the base bill to a misdemeanor. 
That is all the amendment does.
  And what it does do is criminalize the presence of the people here 
who have overstayed their visas. Now those who have entered the United 
States illegally, not through a port of entry and not submitting 
themselves to inspection by U.S. Immigration and Customs authorities 
commit a crime. That is a crime now. It is a Federal misdemeanor.
  But if you do go through inspection and do not go home when you are 
supposed to, then it becomes a civil ground of inadmissibility. So we 
are treating illegal aliens differently. You are a potential 
misdemeanant if convicted if you entered the United States illegally. 
But if you overstayed your visa and did not go home, then you do not 
subject yourself to criminal prosecution.
  The bill takes care of this anomaly. But it makes both offenses 
felonies. What this amendment does, it makes it misdemeanors. So if you 
are against the amendment, you want to keep it as felonies because that 
is in the base bill. You should be for the amendment to make it a 
misdemeanor for the reasons that I have stated.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time 
as I might consume.
  In taking a look at section 203, the application of criminality is 
actually quite broad. If you are here in the United States holding a 
student visa, there are requirements, for example, that you take a 
certain number of units in order to maintain that status. If, for 
example, you fall below that, and I will say that there are many 
students who, for one reason or another, one quarter might fall below 
where they may need to be, you would be in violation of your student 
visa status. Under the amendment before us, you would not just be 
disappointing your parents who paid full tuition, you would be 
committing a misdemeanor.
  If you are a businessman here and your return flight home is 
cancelled, causing your visitors visa, your B2 visa, to be expired, not 
only would you be in technical violation if you were 2 days late to the 
flight home, but you would also be committing a misdemeanor.
  I do not think that is a reasonable approach. I also do not think 
that it has anything to do with keeping our country safer. You know, 
this debate started yesterday on the floor of the House. But it has 
been ongoing in the media for quite some time. The John and Ken show in 
California every day is taking about illegal immigration.
  And we saw many Members, our friends on the other side of the aisle, 
touting that they were going to have this tough bill. And then, of 
course, today, we see that the Republicans are trying to back off on 
that a little bit. So it is easy to say one thing to the red meat talk 
shows, but here, of course, we need to make some adjustments.
  We think the adjustment is misguided, and it is not one that I can 
support.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of the 
time.
  Mr. Chairman, two of the 9/11 hijackers overstayed their visas. Under 
the current law, that is just a civil ground of inadmissibility. I 
think that that should be some type of a crime so that at least they 
can be detained.
  The businessperson who inadvertently overstays their visa because the 
flight is canceled, no problem; no prosecutor is going to prosecute 
that person because of it. I see some games being played here. The 
people who are saying that this bill is too harsh want to keep these 
penalties as felonies. I do not know why that is. I think it will be 
much better to make them misdemeanors, because at least, that way, we 
do not have to have the taxpayers pay for a lawyer to defend them if 
they do not have any money. And we do not have to have the space to 
incarcerate them in Federal penitentiaries.
  This amendment makes the bill workable. I believe it is a good 
amendment. I urge its adoption.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Gutierrez.)
  Mr. GUTIERREZ. Mr. Chairman, I stand in opposition to this amendment. 
I think that we should move forward and make sure that we have the 
groundwork for a program that allows, as President Bush has stated, 
those who work hard, play by the rules, to come out of the darkness and 
come out of the shadows and come forward.

[[Page 29126]]

  I do not think we should criminalize it at any level. We have 
administrative review now. We have civil penalties. We have a process. 
And I do not see why we should change that process, if indeed, as the 
chairman has said and so many people have said, that, next year, we are 
coming back to fix this thing.
  Well, let us not cause any interruptions in fixing this thing. I said 
we should not criminalize this in the first place just on principle. We 
have civil statutes that deal with this.
  So I stand, and the Hispanic Congressional Caucus has unanimously 
adopted a position to stand against this motion and this amendment in 
particular.
  Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of 
the time to the gentleman from California (Mr. Berman) for the purpose 
of entering into a brief colloquy.
  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
  I want to understand the state of play. If this amendment goes to a 
vote, a recorded vote, then am I to understand that the chairman and 
the Republican leadership has offered a tough bill and now they are 
asking their colleagues on the majority side to soften the criminal 
penalties for illegal immigration?
  Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. We will soon discover.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mr. Hayes). The question is on the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the 
ayes appeared to have it.
  Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded 
vote.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin 
will be postponed.


                Amendment No. 8 Offered by Ms. Velazquez

  Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 8 printed in House Report 109-350 offered by 
     Ms. Velazquez:
       At the end of title II, insert the following:

     SEC. 211. REDUCTION IN IMMIGRATION BACKLOG.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall 
     require that, not later than six months after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Director of United States 
     Citizenship and Immigration Services (in this section 
     referred to as ``USCIS'') undertake maximum efforts to reduce 
     to the greatest extent practicable the backlog in the 
     processing and adjudicative functions of USCIS.
       (b) Pilot Program Initiatives.--
       (1) In general.--The Director is authorized to implement a 
     pilot program for the purposes of, to the greatest extent 
     practicable--
       (A) reducing the backlog in the processing of immigration 
     benefit applications; and
       (B) preventing such backlog from recurring.
       (2) Initiatives.--To carry out paragraph (1), initiatives 
     may include measures such as increasing personnel, 
     transferring personnel to focus on areas with the largest 
     potential for backlog, streamlining paperwork processes, and 
     increasing information technology and service centers.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 621, the 
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez) and a Member opposed each 
will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.
  Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I offer this amendment at a time when our immigration 
system continues to fail America's hardworking families, at a time when 
immigration laws continue to separate our Nation's families and at a 
time when our country is so desperately seeking fair and comprehensive 
immigration reform.
  Millions of close family members continue to languish in a wearisome 
visa backlog process for years waiting to be reunited with their loved 
ones. The seemingly endless application process creates desperation and 
homelessness for hardworking immigrants in a Nation where we hear so 
much about family values being a priority. We must provide relief for 
these families struggling to be together.
  Beginning in fiscal year 2002, President Bush proposed a $500 million 
initiative to eliminate the immigration processing backlog and attain a 
universal 6-month processing time standard for all immigration 
applicants within 5 years.
  While this initiative has helped to reduce the backlog, the Goverment 
Accountability Office estimates that, as of June 30, 2005, USCIS still 
had 1.2 million cases in its backlog, and the agency was unlikely to 
meet the September 2006 deadline of a 6-month turnaround time for 
applications.
  In my congressional district, we continue to have backlogged cases of 
over a year despite the President's proposed 6-month time standard.
  Elsewhere in the country, there are people waiting up to 22 years for 
their applications to be processed. What is most alarming about the 
cases in my district is that the individuals have been mistakenly 
identified by the USCIS as naturalized when in fact they are not.
  Not only does this create an unnecessary backlog, it poses a national 
security concern. My amendment, which has previously passed the House, 
will help address this issue. The amendment will enable the Department 
of Homeland Security to explore new ways of tackling this problem by 
authorizing the director of the USCIS to implement innovative pilot 
initiatives to eliminate the immigration application processing backlog 
and prevent further backlog from occurring.

                              {time}  1630

  It would encourage initiatives such as increasing or transferring 
personnel to areas with the greatest backlog, streamlining regulations 
and paperwork filing processes, upgrading information technology, and 
increasing immigration service centers throughout the country.
  This amendment recognizes that there is not one specific approach 
toward eliminating the backlog, and therefore it encourages flexibility 
at the local level so pilot project sites can examine the problem in 
new ways. Children should not be left without the guidance of both of 
their parents as they face the joys and trials of school life, building 
friendships, and discovering their individual talents.
  Mothers and fathers should not be denied the chance to watch their 
children grow up into young men and women, moving on to having children 
of their own. And couples should not be separated, leaving one parent 
struggling to make ends meet and serve the needs of their children 
alone. We must help reunite families and ensure that immigrant families 
have the same opportunities as native-born families to live and work 
together as a complete family unit.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in 
opposition, even though I support the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mr. Hayes). Without objection, the gentleman is 
recognized.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I support this amendment, and I want 
to commend the gentlewoman from New York for offering it.
  One can ask all 435 Members of the House of Representatives what is 
the principal area of constituent complaints that caseworkers in our 
local offices deal with, and they will all say immigration complaints, 
because the immigration service legacy, as well as the component parts 
that it has been split into, has not been dealing with these issues 
properly.
  This is an issue that deals with immigration benefits that legal 
aliens are entitled to receive. And it seems to me that if we are the 
welcoming country to legal aliens that we claim to be, we ought to deal 
with their petitions promptly and professionally. That is not being 
done, and we owe it to our present constituents and future 
constituents, as many of these people are eligible for permanent 
resident status and will eventually become citizens of the United 
States, to solve the problems of the backlog in dealing with 
immigration benefits.

[[Page 29127]]

  The Government Accountability Office is about to issue a report that 
will deal with the effects of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration 
Services to reduce the immigration application backlog that has plagued 
the system for years. This report will confirm that this new agency, 
created under the Homeland Security Act and transformed from the old 
Immigration and Naturalization Service, has made significant strides in 
reducing application backlogs since its creation in 2003.
  Nevertheless, more progress needs to be made. The current backlog 
stands at about 1 million applications for immigration benefits. 
Although this figure was reduced from over 3 million applications when 
the new agency was formed, much of this came from definitional changes 
which I have publicly questioned. We must do more to challenge the 
Department of Homeland Security to improve. This will mean a more 
professional and prompt resolution of dealing with the documents that 
legal immigrants need to integrate themselves into American society.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Berman).
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Berman).
  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me an 
additional minute.
  To follow up, I support very strongly the Velazquez amendment, and I 
am glad that the chairman and the majority support it as well. It is 
very important. But as I look at the bill, I find an issue that will 
take a higher precedence than the problem of the backlog in terms of 
our constituents and in terms of our congressional offices and I think 
will put that far in the background in terms of things that most bother 
them, because under the Alien Smuggling and Related Offenses provision 
of the bill that we will be asked to vote on, anyone who assists, 
encourages, directs, or induces a person to reside in or to attempt to 
reside in or remain in the United States, knowing or in reckless 
disregard of the fact that such person is an alien who lacks lawful 
authority to reside or remain in the United States, is subject to 
penalties of up to 5 years in jail if it is not for commercial 
purposes. If it is for commercial purposes, understandably, it would be 
tougher sentences.
  So when a person calls my district office and talks to my 
congressional staff and says, I was here on a temporary visa, the date 
passed, I have an immigration petition pending, is there anything I can 
do? if my office assists that person or suggests that person go see a 
lawyer and perhaps if my assistant does not call the Department of 
Homeland Security and tell them to pick that person up, my staffer, 
potentially, is subject to criminal penalties. Congressional staff do 
not have congressional immunity. That means I am going to have to do 
all the casework in my district office. I think we need a little 
correction of the base bill in this particular area of alien smuggling. 
We are sweeping very widely here.
  With that, I urge adoption of this amendment.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mr. Norwood

  Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 9 printed in House Report 109-350 offered by 
     Mr. Norwood:
       At the end of title II, add the following new sections:

     SEC. 211. FEDERAL AFFIRMATION OF ASSISTANCE IN THE 
                   IMMIGRATION LAW ENFORCEMENT BY STATES AND 
                   POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS OF STATES.

       (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law 
     and reaffirming the existing inherent authority of States, 
     law enforcement personnel of a State or a political 
     subdivision of a State have the inherent authority of a 
     sovereign entity to investigate, identify, apprehend, arrest, 
     detain, or transfer to Federal custody aliens in the United 
     States (including the transportation of such aliens across 
     State lines to detention centers), for the purposes of 
     assisting in the enforcement of the immigration laws of the 
     United States in the course of carrying out routine duties. 
     This State authority has never been displaced or preempted by 
     Congress.
       (b) Construction.--Nothing in this section may be construed 
     to require law enforcement personnel of a State or political 
     subdivision of a State to--
       (1) report the identity of a victim of, or a witness to, a 
     criminal offense to the Secretary of Homeland Security for 
     immigration enforcement purposes; or
       (2) arrest such victim or witness for a violation of the 
     immigration laws of the United States.

     SEC. 212. TRAINING OF STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT 
                   PERSONNEL RELATING TO THE ENFORCEMENT OF 
                   IMMIGRATION LAWS.

       (a) Establishment of Training Manual and Pocket Guide.--Not 
     later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this 
     Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish--
       (1) a training manual for law enforcement personnel of a 
     State or political subdivision of a State to train such 
     personnel in the investigation, identification, apprehension, 
     arrest, detention, and transfer to Federal custody of aliens 
     in the United States (including the transportation of such 
     aliens across State lines to detention centers and the 
     identification of fraudulent documents); and
       (2) an immigration enforcement pocket guide for law 
     enforcement personnel of a State or political subdivision of 
     a State to provide a quick reference for such personnel in 
     the course of duty.
       (b) Availability.--The training manual and pocket guide 
     established in accordance with subsection (a) shall be made 
     available to all State and local law enforcement personnel.
       (c) Applicability.--Nothing in this section shall be 
     construed to require State or local law enforcement personnel 
     to carry the training manual or pocket guide established 
     under subsection (a)(2) with them while on duty.
       (d) Costs.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall be 
     responsible for any and all costs incurred in establishing 
     the training manual and pocket guide under subsection (a).
       (e) Training Flexibility.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall 
     make training of State and local law enforcement officers 
     available through as many means as possible, including 
     residential training at the Center for Domestic Preparedness, 
     onsite training held at State or local police agencies or 
     facilities, online training courses by computer, 
     teleconferencing, and videotape, or the digital video display 
     (DVD) of a training course or courses. E-learning through a 
     secure, encrypted distributed learning system that has all 
     its servers based in the United States, is sealable, 
     survivable, and can have a portal in place within 30 days, 
     shall be made available by the Federal Law Enforcement 
     Training Center Distributed Learning Program for State and 
     local law enforcement personnel.
       (2) Federal personnel training.--The training of State and 
     local law enforcement personnel under this section shall not 
     displace the training of Federal personnel.
       (3) Clarification.--Nothing in this Act or any other 
     provision of law shall be construed as making any 
     immigration-related training a requirement for, or 
     prerequisite to, any State or local law enforcement officer 
     to assist in the enforcement of Federal immigration laws in 
     the normal course of carrying out their normal law 
     enforcement duties.
       (f) Training Limitation.--Section 287(g) of the Immigration 
     and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1357(g)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``Attorney General'' and inserting 
     ``Secretary of Homeland Security'' each place it appears; and
       (2) in paragraph (2), by adding at the end the following: 
     ``Such training shall not exceed 14 days or 80 hours, 
     whichever is longer.''.

     SEC. 213. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO STATE AND LOCAL POLICE 
                   AGENCIES THAT ASSIST IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF 
                   IMMIGRATION LAWS.

       (a) Grants for Special Equipment for Housing and Processing 
     Illegal Aliens.--From amounts made available to make grants 
     under this section, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall 
     make grants to States and political subdivisions of States 
     for procurement of equipment, technology, facilities, and 
     other products that facilitate and are directly related to 
     investigating, apprehending, arresting, detaining, or 
     transporting immigration law violators, including additional 
     administrative costs incurred under this Act.
       (b) Eligibility.--To be eligible to receive a grant under 
     this section, a State or political subdivision of a State 
     must have the authority to, and have in effect the policy and 
     practice to, assist in the enforcement of the immigration 
     laws of the United States in the

[[Page 29128]]

     course of carrying out such agency's routine law enforcement 
     duties.
       (c) Funding.--There is authorized to be appropriated for 
     grants under this section $250,000,000 for each fiscal year.
       (d) GAO Audit.--Not later than 3 years after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the 
     United States shall conduct an audit of funds distributed to 
     States and political subdivisions of States under subsection 
     (a).

     SEC. 214. INSTITUTIONAL REMOVAL PROGRAM (IRP).

       (a) Continuation and Expansion.--
       (1) In general.--The Department of Homeland Security shall 
     continue to operate and implement the program known as the 
     Institutional Removal Program (IRP) which--
       (A) identifies removable criminal aliens in Federal and 
     State correctional facilities;
       (B) ensures such aliens are not released into the 
     community; and
       (C) removes such aliens from the United States after the 
     completion of their sentences.
       (2) Expansion.--The institutional removal program shall be 
     extended to all States. Any State that receives Federal funds 
     for the incarceration of criminal aliens shall--
       (A) cooperate with officials of the institutional removal 
     program;
       (B) expeditiously and systematically identify criminal 
     aliens in its prison and jail populations; and
       (C) promptly convey such information to officials of such 
     program as a condition for receiving such funds.
       (b) Authorization for Detention After Completion of State 
     or Local Prison Sentence.--Law enforcement officers of a 
     State or political subdivision of a State have the authority 
     to--
       (1) hold an illegal alien for a period of up to 14 days 
     after the alien has completed the alien's State prison 
     sentence in order to effectuate the transfer of the alien to 
     Federal custody when the alien is removable or not lawfully 
     present in the United States; or
       (2) issue a detainer that would allow aliens who have 
     served a State prison sentence to be detained by the State 
     prison until personnel from United States Immigration and 
     Customs Enforcement can take the alien into custody.
       (c) Technology Usage.--Technology such as video 
     conferencing shall be used to the maximum extent possible in 
     order to make the Institutional Removal Program (IRP) 
     available in remote locations. Mobile access to Federal 
     databases of aliens, such as IDENT, and live scan technology 
     shall be used to the maximum extent practicable in order to 
     make these resources available to State and local law 
     enforcement agencies in remote locations.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out the institutional removal 
     program--
       (1) $100,000,000 for fiscal year 2007;
       (2) $115,000,000 for fiscal year 2008;
       (3) $130,000,000 for fiscal year 2009;
       (4) $145,000,000 for fiscal year 2010; and
       (5) $160,000,000 for fiscal year 2011.

     SEC. 215. STATE CRIMINAL ALIEN ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (SCAAP).

       Section 241(i)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 
     U.S.C. 1231(i)) is amended by inserting before the period at 
     the end the following: ``and $1,000,000,000 for each 
     subsequent fiscal year''.

     SEC. 216. STATE AUTHORIZATION FOR ASSISTANCE IN THE 
                   ENFORCEMENT OF IMMIGRATION LAWS ENCOURAGED.

       (a) In General.--Effective 2 years after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, a State (or political subdivision of a 
     State) that has in effect a statute, policy, or practice that 
     prohibits law enforcement officers of the State, or of a 
     political subdivision within the State, from assisting or 
     cooperating with Federal immigration law enforcement in the 
     course of carrying out the officers' routine law enforcement 
     duties shall not receive any of the funds that would 
     otherwise be allocated to the State under section 241(i) of 
     the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1231(i)).
       (b) Construction.--Nothing in this section shall require 
     law enforcement officials from States or political 
     subdivisions of States to report or arrest victims or 
     witnesses of a criminal offense.
       (c) Reallocation of Funds.--Any funds that are not 
     allocated to a State or political subdivision of a State due 
     to the failure of the State to comply with subsection (a) 
     shall be reallocated to States that comply with such 
     subsection.
       At the end of title IV, add the following new section:

     SEC. 408. LISTING OF IMMIGRATION VIOLATORS IN THE NATIONAL 
                   CRIME INFORMATION CENTER DATABASE.

       (a) Provision of Information to the NCIC.--Not later than 
     180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
     Under Secretary for Border and Transportation Security of the 
     Department of Homeland Security shall provide the National 
     Crime Information Center of the Department of Justice with 
     such information as the Under Secretary may have on any and 
     all aliens against whom a final order of removal has been 
     issued, any and all aliens who have signed a voluntary 
     departure agreement, any and all aliens who have overstayed 
     their authorized period of stay, and any and all aliens whose 
     visas have been revoked. Such information shall be provided 
     to the National Crime Information Center, and the National 
     Crime Information Center shall enter such information into 
     the Immigration Violators File of the National Crime 
     Information Center database, regardless of whether--
       (1) the alien received notice of a final order of removal;
       (2) the alien has already been removed; or
       (3) sufficient identifying information is available on the 
     alien.
       (b) Inclusion of Information in the NCIC Database.--Section 
     534(a) of title 28, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (3), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (2) by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (5); and
       (3) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following:
       ``(4) acquire, collect, classify, and preserve records of 
     violations of the immigration laws of the United States, 
     regardless of whether the alien has received notice of the 
     violation or whether sufficient identifying information is 
     available on the alien and even if the alien has already been 
     removed; and

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 621, the gentleman 
from Georgia (Mr. Norwood) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 
Conyers) each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.
  Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Chairman Sensenbrenner, Chairman King, 
the Speaker, and the Rules Committee for allowing me to bring this 
amendment.
  It is part of the CLEAR Act that we have been trying to pass for many 
years. We have passed many parts of it. In fact, the majority of the 
people in this body have voted for parts of it in the past, but we 
bring it today for the Members' consideration to do one thing: we are 
simply trying, as I have discussed this over and over with Chairman 
King, we are trying in this amendment to direct local law enforcement 
to help us apprehend the 500,000 illegal immigrants in this country who 
are criminals who are under deportation orders from the American 
courts. And I point out to the Members, Mr. Chairman, that 100,000 of 
those are very violent criminals. That is the purpose of what we are 
trying to do. I look forward to a bipartisan support on this.
  Many Democrats in here have complained the underlying bill does 
nothing to deal with criminal illegal aliens. This amendment does. Many 
Democrats have complained that there is nothing in here that helps 
local law enforcement. This amendment does. So I feel sure we will have 
a very good vote on this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment. This Norwood No. 
65 amendment includes a number of provisions of the CLEAR Act; and in 
addition to giving State and local police the same authority to enforce 
immigration laws as a Federal agent, the provisions do not require, as 
a matter of fact limit, the amount of training that they could receive 
in order to enforce these rather technical provisions.
  Moreover, the provisions require the entry of millions of civil 
immigration law violators into the National Crime Information Center, 
an FBI database of those who are wanted; and these entries go on 
thousands of times each day.
  I am just wondering if my colleague, the author of this amendment, is 
aware of the incredible complexity that he is suggesting now be 
included in this measure. If these categories were limited to wanted 
criminals, that would be one consideration. However, the list includes 
millions of people with technical status violations that are fluid and 
easily remedied, and we would be creating, I think, in my judgment, an 
administrative nightmare.
  We have a lot of examples. But let me just close by saying that local 
police have more than enough work to do hunting down the people that 
are law violators. But entering the names of people with minor status 
problems into a criminal database would overwhelm it and mix those who 
may be legal and those who are not criminals with the rest who are. It 
exposes to liability for

[[Page 29129]]

unlawful arrests. It discourages immigrants from working with local law 
enforcement. And those are the reasons I have serious reservations 
about this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), our chairman.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding 
me this time.
  This amendment clarifies the inherent authority of State and local 
law enforcement officers to enforce the immigration law and provides 
reimbursement to those States and localities for their assistance. Most 
importantly, it provides a means for Federal, State, and local law 
enforcement officers to work together to apprehend, detain, and remove 
illegal aliens.
  The fact is that at the present time there are only 2,000 special 
agents to locate and arrest the entire illegal alien population 
nationwide. The Norwood amendment would allow State and local officers 
who are willing to do so to be a force multiplier for those 2,000 
agents.
  It is a good amendment and should be adopted.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished 
gentleman from California (Mr. Berman).
  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  There is an interesting juxtaposition going on between the 
gentleman's amendment and the base bill. The gentleman says something 
that I think is very important: we have got to prioritize. The priority 
in a country where there are 10, 11 million people who are here without 
status and under this bill and would, therefore, becoming guilty of a 
criminal offense, he says let us get the 500,000, whatever number it 
is, who have committed crimes of violence and economic crimes and 
murder and drug dealing and all these things. And he is right. No one 
can disagree. That should be the most urgent priority.
  But in a universe where you have criminalized all 11 million, you 
have lost our ability to do that. So what is so funny about the 
argument for the gentleman's amendment is that in the context of this, 
all 11 million, it is the flip side of where some people have to wear a 
band designating it and the way of protesting that is everybody wear 
the band. You have lost your ability to prioritize.
  Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I yield for the purpose of making a 
unanimous consent request to the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. 
Bass).
  Mr. BASS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment.
  I stand today in strong support of the Norwood Amendment, which will 
provide State and local law enforcement the necessary authority, 
resources, and intelligence needed to apprehend and detain illegal 
aliens that they encounter during their routine duties. The President 
in his recent comprehensive immigration strategy has called for an 
elimination of ``catch-and-release'' at our national border and it 
essential that this is expanded to include incidents within the 
interior of the country.
  Over 400,000 alien absconders and more than 85,000 criminal illegal 
aliens are in our country. Tragically, many of these criminal aliens 
remain loose within our borders and continue to commit violent crimes 
in our neighborhoods, such as Eduardo Campos Rodriquez, an illegal 
immigrant wanted for four counts of murder and two counts of attempted 
murder. We can not allow cases like this to continue to threaten the 
safety of our citizens in their communities.
  Illegal immigration is a national problem--not one only occurring in 
the communities along the southern border. Throughout the country, 
State and local law enforcement are confronted with this problem 
everyday from large urban cities to the smallest and most rural 
communities. Unfortunately, our State and local law enforcement 
officers lack the critical information, necessary resources, and clear 
authority to detain and process these individuals. Recently, my 
district has been in the national spotlight concerning the various 
strategies that local and State law enforcement are attempting to use 
to address their illegal immigration problem in the absence of federal 
guidance. Recent incidents in New Ipswich, New Hampshire and Hudson, 
New Hampshire forced police officers to release illegal aliens whom 
they had detained during the course of their normal duties due to a 
lack of assistance from Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials. 
In response to having to repeatedly release illegal aliens, the towns' 
law enforcement officers attempted to apply New Hampshire trespassing 
laws to these illegal aliens, so they would have the authority to 
detain the individuals for a longer period of time in hopes that ICE 
would then be able to take custody. Even though this strategy has not 
held up in the courts, it illustrates the need for this essential 
amendment to give law enforcement the authority, resources, and 
intelligence to respond to the unique challenges presented by illegal 
aliens. It is important to point out these incidents happen in 
relatively small communities--the town of Hudson with a population of 
24,000 and the town of New Ipswich with a population of 5,000.
  Overall, State and local law enforcement are looking to Congress to 
provide them with the vital resources, information and authority to 
address this serious security concern. I strongly believe that the 
nation's security must remain our highest priority, and local 
involvement in security solutions is critical to achieving this goal. 
Therefore, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the Norwood 
amendment.
  Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Deal), who has worked on immigration issues for a long 
time.

                              {time}  1645

  Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my colleague for 
bringing this amendment and for yielding me time. He brings an 
important aspect of enforcement to the table, and that is interior 
enforcement.
  Many people believe that only the problem exists along the border, 
and that is not true. My State of Georgia, Congressman Norwood's State 
of Georgia, is one of the fastest growing in terms of population of 
illegal aliens in the country. In fact, in my congressional district in 
north Georgia, two of the five fastest growing populations of illegal 
immigrants are in my congressional district.
  Now, if we want to get serious about enforcement, let us look at what 
the facts are. You heard Congressman Norwood say there are 500,000 
criminal aliens in our country that are waiting to be apprehended. In 
our State of Georgia, one of the fastest growing in illegal populations 
in the country, I am told we only have three enforcement agents. In our 
adjoining State of Alabama, they only have one.
  Are we really serious? Why not tap into the 700,000 State and local 
law enforcement officers who are available and trained to enforce the 
law.
  Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Chairman, let me just point out that if you wish to vote against 
this bill, you are basically saying that you want to allow 500,000 
criminal illegal aliens to stay on the street because 2,000 Federal 
officers simply are not going to remove them. It is impossible. It 
takes the 700,000 local law enforcement people out on the streets to 
help get this done, and we need to fund this. This amendment does that.
  This amendment adds funding for SCAT, which is money needed 
desperately by the cities who deal with so many illegal immigrants.
  Lastly and very importantly, it directs Homeland Security to put in 
place in all 50 States the Institutional Removable Program. Now, you 
want to vote against this? How about us sending a rapist to prison in 
this country and INS is not there to deport them the minute they get 
out? No, they turn them loose on our State. This very thing has 
happened in Georgia with a pedophile.
  This amendment is a reasonable aspect of this bill that brings 
resources to the table, and it brings law enforcement, the people who 
can solve this problem, to help us out.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I think the author of the amendment will rest more 
comfortably tonight when he finds that not only do the people that he 
described that do not want this amendment are

[[Page 29130]]

joined by numerous State and local police departments across the 
Nation, but also scores of groups that work with victims of domestic 
violence.
  The proponents of this amendment must understand that there is 
nothing in this bill to ensure that ICE or SCAT in Homeland Security 
will be able to respond to the millions of requests from local police 
to pick up low-priority civil law violators.
  Remember what the gentleman from California (Mr. Berman) said: you 
cannot dump millions of people into this database and think it is going 
to work. It will not. Turn down the amendment.
  Mr. McCAUL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this 
amendment. My hometown of Austin has seen the horrifying effects that a 
sanctuary policy can have on a community.
  Nearly two years ago an 18-year-old woman named Jenny Garcia was 
found brutally stabbed to death in her Northwest Austin home.
  An illegal alien by the name of David Diaz Morales was one of Jenny's 
coworkers. He made it clear to her that he wanted to be more than just 
her coworker or friend. When Jenny rejected his advances, this put 
David Diaz Morales into a murderous rage.
  On January 26th of last year, Morales broke into Jenny's home, 
forcefully grabbed her, held her down, savagely raped her and then 
brutally stabbed her to death.
  In less than 24 hours, the Austin Police Department arrested this 20 
year old thug who had absolutely no business being in the United 
States, let alone Jenny's home.
  However, David Diaz Morales had no business being free to walk the 
streets either. You see, before becoming Jenny's murderer, he had been 
previously arrested for molesting a child in Austin.
  Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle decided not to prosecute 
Morales's molestation case. Instead, he let him out of jail to commit 
more violent crimes, and when it came to Morales's immigration status 
District Attorney Ronnie Earle looked the other way.
  If only District Attorney Earle had picked up the phone, he would 
have discovered that Morales was in our country illegally. He could 
have contacted immigration officials who would have deported him out of 
our country. He could have saved Jenny's life.
  This is one horrific example of many injustices which could have been 
prevented. That is why we must include this vital amendment to the 
underlying bill. This amendment will put $1 billion in the State 
Criminal Alien Assistance Program, and make the Institutional Removal 
Program, which identifies criminal illegal aliens, mandatory. It also 
gives states, counties and cities 2 full years to come into compliance 
or risk losing State Criminal Alien Assistance Program funds.
  Mr. Chairman, we owe it to victims like Jenny Garcia and so many 
others to include this language in the underlying bill, and I strongly 
urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mr. Hayes). The question is on the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Norwood).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the 
ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia will 
be postponed.


                Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Tancredo

  Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:
       Amendment No. 10 printed in House Report 109-350 offered by 
     Mr. Tancredo of Colorado:
       At the end of title III, add the following:

     SEC. 308. PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF FEDERAL IMMIGRATION 
                   LAWS BY STATES AND LOCALITIES.

       Section 241(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 
     U.S.C. 1231(i)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(7) Prior to entering into a contractual arrangement with 
     a State or political subdivision under paragraph (1), the 
     Attorney General shall determine whether such State or 
     political subdivision has in place any formal or informal 
     policy that violates section 642 of the Illegal Immigration 
     Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 
     1373). The Attorney General shall not enter into a 
     contractual arrangement with, or allocate any of the funds 
     made available under this section to, any State or political 
     subdivision with a policy that violates such section. The 
     Attorney General shall submit to Congress an annual report on 
     any State or political subdivision with a policy that 
     violates such section.''.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 621, the gentleman 
from Colorado (Mr. Tancredo) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado.
  Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, we have had a lot of debate on this bill, of course, 
over, I don't know, the last 24 hours it seems like or more; and it has 
oftentimes been punctuated with the use of the word ``comprehensive'' 
and people complaining about the fact that they do not think it is 
comprehensive, or at least comprehensive enough. But that has been a 
euphemism most of the time for the phrase ``guest worker.'' That is 
what people want in this bill in order to make it ``comprehensive.''
  Let me suggest to you it would do nothing, absolutely nothing, to 
make this bill comprehensive. A bill designed to deal with border 
security and internal enforcement of our laws in no way helps us 
accomplish those goals by including anything like a guest worker 
program.
  Hence, I believe that this bill, as it was written and as it has been 
amended, and hopefully with the amendments that are going to be 
accepted at the end of the discussion of the bill, I believe it has 
become a comprehensive bill. Not totally comprehensive. There are 
certainly things I would like to see in it. Congressman Deal's issue of 
birthright citizenship, I wish that were in there, and a couple of 
other things that we will continue to work on. But to a great extent, 
it begins, for the first time, to actually deal with a problem in what 
I think is a comprehensive way, and I mean it in this form.
  We have a supply and a demand problem. The supply problem is coming 
across the border. We are in this bill doing something very specific 
about that with the inclusion of the amendment, with the passage of the 
amendment, to build some barrier along at lease 700 miles of our 
southern border. I hope we continue with that, by the way, along the 
entire border, to the extent it is feasible, and the northern border we 
could start next. That is dealing with the supply side of this problem.
  The demand side of the problem is, of course, the job magnet that is 
created by people here who provide jobs for people who come across the 
border illegally, and in many cases do so knowingly. And I want to 
commend the Speaker of the House, I want to commend the leadership of 
my party, I want to commend the chairman of this committee, and I want 
to commend my colleagues on this side of the aisle for doing something 
that is difficult.
  We are going up against economic interests that are extremely 
powerful. Many of them, of course, have been supporters of Republicans 
for years, the Chamber of Commerce and the rest. We have actually said 
to them, you know what, we are going to put our Nation's security and 
the importance of border security above all of these other issues and 
above the economic interests you bring to bear because so many of you 
are making so much money off illegal aliens. You are exploiting them. 
We know that this is happening, and we are going to try to put a stop 
to it, because in this bill we actually have something called internal 
enforcement.
  We are going to do something about employer enforcement of the law. 
We are going to give them the opportunity and the tools to do that.
  Again, I wish it were better. I wish we had a shorter period of time 
for the law, for checking the Social Security numbers to go into 
effect. But, nonetheless, it is there. We have made enormous strides 
with this bill, enormous, I must admit to you more than I had 
anticipated we could do, certainly, in this term of the Congress. But I 
am happy that we are here.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Culberson).
  Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Chairman, I want to show the American people what 
a typical day looks like for a law

[[Page 29131]]

enforcement officer on the southern border. This is the result of an 
arrest that took place in Nuevo Loredo and this is what the sheriffs 
are facing. This is what our Border Patrol is facing: 40 millimeter 
grenade launchers, 12 of them captured; 10,000 rounds of ammunition; 40 
AK-47 rifles. These are carried by individuals, paramilitary commandos, 
who are trained to kill anybody who stops and attempts to intercept 
them.
  These are 40 millimeter grenades that are taped up with adhesive tape 
designed to be put on top of a warm engine, and as the glue softens, 
the tape comes off and the grenade explodes. This is a sniper rifle 
carried by the narcoterrorist commandos that shoots around corners. It 
has a television screen and a silencer on it.
  This is the level of sophistication of these people that our sheriffs 
are facing. These narcoterrorists are so bold, Mr. Chairman, and the 
lawlessness is so pervasive on the border that the narcoterrorists have 
set up, according to the FBI, at least one narcoterrorist training camp 
outside of Matamoros operating in the open, run by the zadas to train 
gun runners, human smugglers, smugglers who pay cash, who keep their 
mouths shut. They can go to this training camp outside of Matamoros and 
they will be carried into the United States. There may be three others 
operating just across the river from the United States in the open.
  This is a law and order issue that the United States must deal with 
through our locally elected law enforcement officials and the Border 
Patrol.
  I thank the chairman for bringing this bill to the House.
  Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Chairman, I intend to withdraw the amendment. The issue that I 
was bringing to the table with regard to this sanctuary city has been 
dealt with to a significant extent by my colleague, Mr. Campbell, from 
California. In that light, I will in fact withdraw my amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Colorado?
  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, reserving the right to object, and I do not 
intend to object, I wanted to simply point out to my friend from 
Colorado that before he praises this legislation too much, he should 
make sure there really is a strategy to turn it into a law, because I 
am very skeptical that you will ever see this bill coming back from 
here, very skeptical. If I had to bet, I would bet these provisions 
which you like and which you think make this into an attractive 
proposition and a serious attempt will never be seen again.
  I simply want to add one other point: one day I would like you to 
explain to me how the employee verification system, which I think, like 
you do, is a critical part of dealing with the problem of illegal 
immigration, will ever get implemented in the context of 10, 11, 12 
million people in this country in unauthorized status.
  Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BERMAN. I yield to the gentleman from Colorado.
  Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman knows that I have often 
approached this particular issue with a certain degree of cynicism, 
perhaps the same amount as he is expressing right now in terms of its 
prospects.
  All I know is this: this is what I have before me today. This is what 
this House is being asked to address and to accomplish. That one thing, 
if nothing else happens, I am happy to have been able to get it to this 
point.
  I am truly hopeful, and I recognize full well the gentleman is right 
that there are major obstacles to getting this beyond this point, but 
that is a fight to fight tomorrow. Today we are here, it is a good 
bill, and I certainly hope that we can pass it.
  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, without accepting the gentleman's 
assumptions about the worthiness of the bill, I withdraw my reservation 
of objection.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
  There was no objection.


                 Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. Nadler

  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:
       Amendment No. 11 printed in House Report 109-350 offered by 
     Mr. Nadler:
       Strike section 407.

  The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 621, the gentleman 
from New York (Mr. Nadler) and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. 
Sensenbrenner) each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, my amendment strikes section 407. Section 407 expands 
the controversial policy of expedited removal, which grants 
extraordinary power to low-level immigration officers to order deported 
without any judicial review and without any fair hearing people who 
arrive at ports of entry without proper documentation.
  This section would authorize such unreviewable deportation decisions, 
again without any real judicial review, for anyone picked up within 100 
miles of any U.S. border, not just at ports of entry or near the 
Mexican border. My amendment would prevent this expansion of expedited 
removal and limit its use to the present locations.
  If the amendment passes, we would still, of course, deport illegal 
aliens; but people arrested within the U.S. would continue to have the 
right to some judicial review, some due process before being deported. 
They would have the right, as they do now, to challenge the decision of 
the Border Patrol agent.
  By imposing expedited removal proceedings on all aliens apprehended 
within 100 miles of any border, this bill would deny thousands of 
people all due process rights.

                              {time}  1700

  The expedited removal process poses the gravest risks to refugees 
fleeing human rights abuses. Those fleeing torture, imprisonment or 
other forms of persecution are often forced to travel without valid 
documents because there is not enough time to obtain them or because it 
is too dangerous to apply for them.
  Those fleeing persecution or the Gestapo or the KGB or the Savak are 
least likely to have properly notarized and stamped documents, 
countersigned by the Gestapo, the KGB or the Savak.
  The expansion of the expedited removal process puts refugee women and 
children fleeing rape, honor killings, female mutilation, forced 
marriages and sexual slavery particularly at risk because these victims 
have the most difficulty sharing and explaining their painful stories 
to border agents who may not be experts in foreign cultures.
  Furthermore, when individuals are placed in expedited removal, they 
do not have access to relief from deportation under the Violence 
Against Women Act, the temporary protected status or as trafficking 
victims.
  My amendment seeks to prevent the inevitable consequences of 
deporting more asylum seekers, battered immigrants, trafficking victims 
and others who may be legally entitled to remain but who have no real 
opportunity for any appeal from the hasty judgment of the border agent, 
no due process.
  Even as currently applied, expedited removal has resulted in terrible 
mistakes, including its wrongful application to genuine refugees and 
even to U.S. citizens. The Senate heard the case of Sharon McKnight, an 
American citizen from New York of Jamaican descent who suffers a mental 
disability and was wrongly put into expedited removal and sent to 
Jamaica because an inspector mistakenly thought her passport was fake.
  Expanding this policy to include persons already within the United 
States poses grave constitutional problems. Immigration laws long made 
a distinction between those aliens seeking admission to the U.S. and 
those who are already within the U.S., regardless of the legality of 
their entry. In Zadvydas v. Davis, the Supreme Court held ``once an 
alien enters the country, the legal

[[Page 29132]]

status changes, for the Due Process Clause applies to all `persons' 
within the United States, including aliens, whether their presence here 
is lawful, unlawful, temporary or permanent.''
  Because there is no check or review of expedited removal decisions, 
there is no due process. This policy should not be expanded. It should 
be left where it is as my amendment would do.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment which would 
strike the provision added by the bill the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Daniel E. Lungren), mandating expedited removal for other than 
Mexican aliens apprehended after entering illegally within 14 days and 
100 hundred miles of entry.
  Unlike what the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler) said, the 
Lungren provision in this bill applies to land borders only, and it 
would not apply to asylum seekers who ask for asylum at the time they 
enter through a port of entry.
  The provision that this amendment would strike is crucial to ending 
the current practice of catch and release of aliens along the southern 
border. While nationals of Mexico who are apprehended along the 
southern border can be returned to Mexico, the nationals of other 
countries cannot. Rather these aliens, known as OTMs, must be placed in 
removal proceedings which is a process that can take months. Because of 
a lack of detention space, most are released on the promise that they 
will show up for their adjudication.
  Experience has shown that if OTMs are released to attend their 
removal proceedings, they will likely disappear. Of the 8,908 notices 
to appear at the immigration court at Harlingen, Texas, issued last 
year to OTMs, 8,767 failed to show up for their hearings, according to 
the statistics compiled by the Justice Departments's Executive Office 
of Immigration Review.
  The fact that these aliens were able to enter illegally, be released 
and then disappear into society has encouraged even more OTMs to 
illegally enter. Arrests of non-Mexicans along the U.S.-Mexico border, 
which total 14,935 in 1995 and 28,598 in 2000, rose to 65,814 in fiscal 
year 2004.
  As nationals of these countries have entered with impunity, they have 
encouraged others to do so also. The Lungren provision addresses the 
problem of catch and release by requiring DHS to remove these OTMs who 
are apprehended within 14 days of entry and 100 miles of the border 
through expedited procedures. This codifies DHS's current practices. By 
limiting the amount of time that aliens are in proceedings, these 
procedures allow DHS to use its limited detention space more 
effectively. This in turn ensures that more aliens can be detained, 
which discourages other aliens from attempting to enter illegally.
  I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, the real question here is due process. We all want to 
deport illegal aliens. We all want to deport people who are not here 
legally. But the question is because the Border Control agent thinks 
that someone may not be here legally, because he thinks that the 
passport is fake, should there be no appeal? Should there be no ability 
to show facts? Should there be no due process?
  This country is built on due process. This country is built on a 
foundation of liberty and proper process.
  The Department of Homeland Security states that expedited procedures 
currently cannot be applied to the nearly 1 million aliens who are 
apprehended annually on the southwest border, where it can legally be 
applied, as it is not possible to initiate formal removal proceedings 
against all the aliens.
  So you cannot use it in too many of the cases where it is legal now, 
so let us expand it so we cannot use it in millions of more cases.
  Mr. Chairman, I realize that we have to talk about the principle of 
due process. I also realize that not passing this amendment is going to 
result in a fiction, the fiction of having this policy where we cannot 
use it for millions of people. So I am not sure what the practical 
impact of that will be.
  I recognize there is no point to spending more time on this. I wanted 
to make the point about due process, and I hope the Senate will listen.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIRMAN (Mr. Culberson). Is there objection to the 
request of the gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now 
rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Hayes) having assumed the chair, Mr. Culberson, Acting Chairman of the 
Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that 
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 4437) to 
amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to strengthen enforcement of 
the immigration laws, to enhance border security, and for other 
purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.

                          ____________________