[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 8]
[Senate]
[Pages 10644-10645]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                              IMMIGRATION

  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I note that today the Department of 
Homeland Security is announcing the publication of a regulation that 
addresses a deficiency in the work verification process to make sure 
that only people who can legally work in the United States are capable 
of doing so. Of course, this is long overdue.
  The Senate and the House have both passed immigration bills that 
would overhaul employment verification laws. Restricting the employment 
of undocumented workers as a means of reducing illegal immigration is 
not a new concept. For decades, policymakers have recognized that 
eliminating the magnet of illegal employment is the key, some might 
even say the linchpin, to controlling illegal immigration.
  In 1981, the bipartisan Select Commission on Immigration and Refugee 
Policy recommended legislation making it illegal to hire undocumented 
workers. In 1997, the bipartisan U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform 
stated that eliminating the employment magnet is the linchpin of a 
comprehensive strategy to deter unlawful immigration.
  The U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform went on to conclude that 
``the most promising option for verifying work authorization is a 
computerized registry based on the Social Security number.''
  Despite 25 years of consensus, current employment verification laws 
are unworkable and unenforceable. An employer must review some 
combination of up to 29 different documents to determine whether a new 
worker is legal. Document fraud and identity theft have contributed to 
the problem, making it easier for unscrupulous employers to look the 
other way and hire unauthorized workers. The employer sanctions 
provisions that were passed in 1986, which were supposed to be the 
tradeoff for the amnesty provided to 3 million people--those employer 
sanctions have been completely ineffective. So while the amnesty was a 
success in the sense that 3 million people got a pass, the enforcement 
necessary to avoid another buildup of illegal aliens was never 
delivered.
  As I said at the outset, the Department of Homeland Security is 
issuing the publication of a regulation today that addresses this 
deficiency. It is proposing a rule that will help responsible employers 
ensure that they are not employing individuals who cannot legally work 
in the United States. When hired, employees in the United States must 
present documents to their employers to show that they can work here 
legally. Many people use their Social Security card as one of those 
documents.
  When unauthorized aliens try to defraud their employers by presenting 
fraudulent identification or Social Security cards, the employers will 
often receive a ``no match'' letter from the Social Security 
administration. This ``no match'' letter informs the employer that the 
name associated with the Social Security number does not match.
  Until now, many employers have not known what steps to take upon 
receiving such a mismatch notice. Many mistakenly believe that they 
must immediately fire the employee. The absence of clear guidance has 
frustrated employers and, all too often, legal employees end up losing 
their jobs because of this confusion. The proposed rule outlines clear 
steps that employers can take in reaction to receiving ``no match'' 
letters.
  The proposed rule contains a safe harbor for employers. If businesses 
follow these procedures in good faith, they can be assured they will 
not be subject to sanctions.
  While the vast majority of employers seek to comply with the law, too 
many

[[Page 10645]]

employers turn a blind eye to obvious violations of the law. In fact, a 
small percentage of employers are responsible for a large percentage of 
``no match'' letters. The General Accounting Office reported that 
between 1985 and the year 2000, only 8,900 employers were responsible 
for 30 percent of ``no match'' reports.
  Some of the other statistics in the General Accounting Office report 
are even more troubling. Several employers used one Social Security 
number for more than 100 different employees--the same Social Security 
number for more than 100 different employees. One employer used a 
single Social Security number for 2,580 different wage reports. Mr. 
President, 8.9 million wage reports had all zeros for the Social 
Security number. In other words, there was no attempt made whatsoever 
to come up with the correct and accurate number, so zeros were offered 
as a Social Security number in 8.9 million wage reports.
  Mr. President, 43 different employers used the same Social Security 
number for more than one employee--for 16 years in a row.
  The Department of Homeland Security recently conducted the largest 
worksite enforcement raid to date against a company known as IFCO 
Systems, arresting more than 1,000 illegal aliens and charging several 
managers with criminal violations.
  Approximately 53.4 percent of the Social Security numbers for IFCO 
systems were invalid--half--and Social Security had notified the 
company more than 13 times regarding these discrepancies before it 
finally acted.
  This regulation will therefore provide guidance to employers who seek 
to comply with the law and will allow the Government to prosecute those 
who turn a blind eye. But this action by the Department of Homeland 
Security is only a Band-Aid for the underlying problem. Employers do 
not have a reliable method to ascertain whether employees are eligible 
to work in the United States. A paper-based system such as we have now, 
where you can use up to 29 different documents, will always be 
vulnerable to fraud and abuse.
  Electronic verification is the way. It has been tested for more than 
10 years, and an independent review of the program, the so-called basic 
pilot program, found that 96 percent of participating employers believe 
the electronic verification system is an effective tool for employment 
verification. The Senate immigration bill improves upon the current 
paper-based system and requires an expansion of the electronic 
verification system. But the Department of Homeland Security Secretary 
Chertoff told me personally that he has problems with some of the 
provisions in the Senate bill and that, as drafted, he considers it 
unworkable.
  In my capacity as chairman of the Immigration, Border Security and 
Citizenship Subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee, I intend to 
hold a hearing in the coming weeks on this critical issue of employment 
verification to make sure we get it right.
  Twenty years ago Congress sold Americans a bill of goods. They said 
if you will accept the amnesty, then we will have workable worksite 
verifi-
cations and sanctions against employers who cheat. Yet today, here we 
are wrestling with the problem, not of 3 million undocumented workers 
but 12 million. Obviously, the amnesty without worksite verification 
and employer sanctions is merely a magnet for future illegal 
immigration.
  I believe Americans are a forgiving people. If someone makes a 
mistake and repents, asks forgiveness and says; I'll try better next 
time, they are pretty forgiving. But if we are viewed as merely 
repeating the same mistakes and attempting to trick the American people 
into accepting another amnesty without actually trying to solve the 
problem, the consequences for our society and for our national security 
and for our economy will be too great.
  I will, therefore, continue to work with my colleagues diligently 
during the conference with the House to develop an employment 
verification system, along with a temporary worker program, that 
reduces employer burdens and protects workers' rights, but which will 
allow us finally, once and for all, to come to grips with our broken 
immigration system.

                          ____________________