[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 7]
[House]
[Pages 9658-9661]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 MAKING TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO PROVISION GRANTING SPECIAL IMMIGRANT 
                       STATUS FOR CERTAIN IRAQIS

  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and 
pass the Senate bill (S. 2829) to make technical corrections to section 
1244 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, 
which provides special immigrant status for certain Iraqis, and for 
other purposes.
  The Clerk read the title of the Senate bill.
  The text of the Senate bill is as follows:

                                S. 2829

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO PROVISION GRANTING 
                   SPECIAL IMMIGRANT STATUS FOR CERTAIN IRAQIS.

       Section 1244(c) of the National Defense Authorization Act 
     for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``each of the five years 
     beginning after the date of the

[[Page 9659]]

     enactment of this Act'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2008 
     through 2012''; and
       (2) in paragraph (3)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A)--
       (i) in the subparagraph heading, by striking ``one through 
     four'' and inserting ``2008 through 2011''; and
       (ii) by striking ``one through four'' and inserting ``2008 
     through 2011''; and
       (B) in subparagraph (B)--
       (i) in the matter preceding clause (i)--

       (I) in the subparagraph heading, by striking ``five and 
     six'' and inserting ``2012 and 2013'';
       (II) by striking ``the fifth fiscal year beginning after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act'' and inserting 
     ``fiscal year 2012''; and
       (III) by striking ``the sixth fiscal year beginning after 
     such date'' and inserting ``fiscal year 2013''; and

       (ii) in each of clauses (i) and (ii), by striking ``the 
     fifth fiscal year'' and inserting ``fiscal year 2012''.

     SEC. 2. AUTHORITY TO CONVERT PETITIONS DURING TRANSITION 
                   PERIOD.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security or the 
     Secretary of State may convert an approved petition for 
     special immigrant status under section 1059 of the National 
     Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 (8 U.S.C. 1101 
     note) with respect to which a visa under such section 1059 is 
     not immediately available to an approved petition for special 
     immigrant status under section 1244 of the National Defense 
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181) 
     notwithstanding any requirement of subsection (a) or (b) of 
     such section 1244 but subject to the numerical limitations 
     applicable under subsection (c) of such section 1244, as 
     amended by this Act.
       (b) Duration.--The authority under subsection (a) shall be 
     available only with respect to petitions filed before October 
     1, 2008.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Scott) and the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King) each will 
control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.


                             General Leave

  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all 
Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and 
include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Virginia?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, we owe a duty to protect foreign nationals who provide 
valuable service to our soldiers, diplomats, and other government 
officials overseas. Often these individuals risk their lives and those 
of their families to assist and protect our endeavors and our people. 
It's only right that we give them the assistance and protection that 
they need.
  When we pulled out of Vietnam, Vietnamese citizens who worked for our 
government, as well as their families, were at great risk of being 
killed if they remained in Vietnam. To protect them, we gave them the 
opportunity to resettle in the United States. That was the right thing 
to do then and it is the right thing to do now for those who help us in 
Iraq.
  This bill addresses two problems that currently interfere with our 
ability to protect those who deserve our protection. The first is a 
drafting error in the new Special Immigrant Visa Program that we 
enacted in January for Iraqis whose lives were at risk because of their 
valuable service to our government. The visas under this program were 
supposed to be available beginning this fiscal year, but the drafting 
error has rendered these visas unavailable until the next fiscal year. 
In the interim, we can't help those who need our help. Many of those 
could die because of this drafting error. This bill would correct the 
drafting error to ensure that these visas can be immediately accessed.
  S. 2829 also serves to assist several hundred Iraqi and Afghan 
translators who, because of the error, continue to apply for visas 
under the older program. Although many of their applications have been 
processed and approved, they can can't come to the United States 
because of a cap at 500 visas in the program that has already been 
reached.
  Despite having the support of the Department of Defense, the 
Department of State and the Department of Homeland Security, these 
translators are without recourse and remain in danger. This bill 
addresses the problem by creating a 4-month transitional period under 
which the administration can allow persons with approved petitions in 
the old program to use one of the 5,000 visas in the new program.
  We have all seen in the news that those who have chosen to help us in 
our efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan are truly risking their lives for 
our Nation's interests. They are targeted by insurgents for having 
helped us, their families are targeted, and this bill helps us protect 
them.
  I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Now I must oppose this legislation, Mr. Speaker. It amends flawed 
legislation enacted this year that unjustifiably bypassed the normal 
committee process.
  The National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2008 contained 
an expansive new refugee program that could result in well over 100,000 
refugee admissions to the United States over the next 5 years. This 
provision was never considered, let alone approved, by the Judiciary 
Committee or on the House floor.
  It's simply irresponsible for this Congress to hand out over 100,000 
green cards without allowing for the normal deliberative review 
process. The provision grants 5,000 ``special immigrant'' green cards a 
year for the next 5 years to Iraqi nationals who meet the following 
criteria: They are citizens or nationals of Iraq; they were employed by 
or on behalf of the United States Government in Iraq on or after March 
20, 2003, and they were employed for not less than a year; they 
provided faithful and valuable service to the United States Government; 
and they have experienced or are experiencing an ongoing serious threat 
as a consequence of their employment by the U.S. Government.
  Now, I would say, Mr. Speaker, that our military that served in the 
line of fire has experienced a threat as a consequence of their 
employment of the U.S. Government, so has most everyone who has served 
any duty in that country. And this is a wide-open definition that 
allows the State Department to make a determination based upon a broad 
definition that says if they've experienced an ongoing serious threat 
as a consequence of their employment, and ``ongoing'' is not defined.
  This provision is well-intentioned, however, it is problematic for a 
number of reasons. First, the State Department estimates that each of 
the 5,000 beneficiaries will bring an average of four family members 
with them who will not count against the cap. Therefore, the provision 
would result in, according to State Department estimates, upwards of 
25,000 green cards being granted per year for 5 years. My math on that 
is 125,000, Mr. Speaker. Given that legal immigration now regularly 
exceeds 1 million persons a year, and the American people, by 
overwhelming margins, do not want to see further increases at least 
until we enforce the law and get operational control of the border, 
these numbers today are irresponsible.
  Second, the provision will produce a drain for pro-U.S. and pro-
democracy Iraqis actually living in Iraq. This potential exodus may 
prove devastating to efforts to rebuild that country.
  Third, the provision grants refugee status to aliens who do not meet 
the long-standing statutory definition of a refugee--a person who is 
persecuted or who has a well-founded fear of persecution on account of 
race, religion, nationality, membership in a social group, or political 
opinion. That's the definition that exists today that the State 
Department could act under, Mr. Speaker. But we should not be setting 
such precedent without very careful deliberation.
  Fourth, terrorists could easily infiltrate this program and not only 
gain access to the U.S., but attain the benefits of legal permanent 
residence and then U.S. citizenship. These benefits

[[Page 9660]]

include the ability to travel the world over with the knowledge that 
one can easily return to the U.S., leaving us more vulnerable.
  The inclusion of this refugee program in the Department of Defense 
authorization bill without adequate deliberation was a mistake, and in 
this follow-on bill it also is a mistake. Therefore, I cannot support 
today's legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I would reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may 
consume to the gentlelady from Texas, Ms. Sheila Jackson-Lee.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Again, let me thank the members of the 
Judiciary Committee, the chairman and ranking member and the manager of 
this bill, Mr. Scott.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a question of life or death. Many of us have 
traveled to Iraq. I just recently came back in the last couple of 
weeks. In fact, I was utilizing our delegation's Iraqi translators. We 
were out in the field, we were talking to Iraqi soldiers, and these 
translators were enormously important. They're utilized in Afghanistan 
as well.
  But it is not just the translators and others in this realm, in this 
era, that we speak of. We remember those who ventured out in the early 
stages of this war that was initiated by this administration, 
individuals who jeopardized the lives of their families and themselves 
to really align themselves with U.S. soldiers, necessary vital 
components of serving the soldiers in order to save the U.S. soldiers' 
lives.

                              {time}  1615

  Some of these individuals still remain under threat in Iraq.
  This is a balanced approach. This is an approach order offered by 
Senator Kennedy along with a number of bipartisan Senators. And let me 
pay tribute to Senator Kennedy. He has always looked to balance our 
security along with benefit. I pay tribute to him, and I particularly 
pay tribute to him for this initiative because what it says is for 
those who have been caught in an abyss, who have been caught in between 
and in betwixt now have 5,000 visas to be able to utilize to provide a 
safety net for them and their families.
  There are millions of internally displaced persons in Iraq. It is a 
disruptive and an unstable situation. Those individuals who have lent 
their talents to the U.S. Government and the U.S. military face 
jeopardy. Many of their neighbors know what they have done.
  So I rise to support this legislation because I believe it is a 
partnership between the Homeland Security Department and the State 
Department, working together to ensure, as they vet these individuals, 
that they have access to the visas.
  The problem that this is fixing is that the loophole or the provision 
was closed, legitimately closed for legitimate requests, and 
individuals who were applying under an old process, that would not make 
them eligible. This simply clears up that problem. It vets the 
individuals to utilize the visas, and it helps to save lives.
  I ask, Mr. Speaker, that our colleagues support this legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 2829, an act to make 
technical corrections to section 1244 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for fiscal year 2008, which provides special 
immigrant status for certain Iraqis, and for other purposes.
  This bill addresses two problems with our ability to protect those 
who deserve our protection. In January, we enacted a new Special 
Immigrant Visa, SIV, program for Iraqis whose lives are at risk because 
of their valuable service to our government. The SIVs were supposed to 
be available beginning this fiscal year. But a drafting error rendered 
the SIVs unavailable until the next fiscal year. The bill fixes these 
errors.
  The bill also helps out a few hundred Iraqi and Afghan translators 
who, because of the error, continued to apply for visas under an older 
program. Although many of their applications have been processed and 
approved, they cannot come to the U.S. because of the 500 visa cap in 
that program has already been reached.
  This bill would create a 4-month transition period under which the 
Administration can allow persons with approved petitions in the older 
program to use one of the 5,000 visas in the new program.
  We owe a duty to protect foreign nationals who provide valuable 
services to our soldiers, diplomats, and other government officials 
overseas. These individuals risk their lives and that of their 
families, to assist and to protect our endeavors and our people. It is 
only right that we return the favor.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, this discussion is about the technical changes to 
existing ill-advised legislation that came through this Congress, not 
through the Judiciary Committee, but it came to this floor without the 
due process and the consultation that would come from people on both 
sides of the aisle that could have examined this and measured the 
consequences, in fact, the unintended consequences of this legislation.
  Under current law the President can set the number of refugees, and 
the Secretary of State administers this. We've met with the Secretary 
of State on this, and the definition I provided in my remark of 
existing law that is well-founded and well-tested says that the 
refugees meeting this standard can come into the United States under a 
number of items as agreed to by the administration, generally by the 
Secretary of State. And a person who would qualify would be a person 
who is persecuted or who has a well-founded fear of persecution on 
account of their race, religion, nationality, membership in a 
particular social group, or political opinion. These applicants that 
would come under this standard don't meet this standard that exists 
under refugee law because the threat is not as great, and they want to 
open this up for folks that have not faced a threat that is as great.
  So now the language that's in the bill that we are seeking to 
technically correct here is language that says, well, what kind of 
standards do they meet? Well, up to 125,000 of them, perhaps, over this 
5-year period of this authorization, what do they have to be? They have 
to be an Iraqi. They have to have worked for Uncle Sam. Their work had 
to have had value. And then they had to have experienced or maybe 
currently are experiencing a serious threat. And I will submit that 
everybody that works for the Federal Government experienced a threat. 
Anybody that set foot inside the Green Zone experienced a threat. 
Anybody that set foot outside the Green Zone probably experienced a 
greater threat. So the experience of the threat that's defined in this 
bill is opened up to all Iraqis that might want to present themselves 
if they are an Iraqi; if they worked for the Federal Government, if 
Uncle Sam cut them a check, worked for a year; and then if their work 
had value, which I think all work really does have value.
  So what we're doing here is a technical correction that shouldn't 
have been passed in the first place, that should have gone through the 
regular order, that should have been submitted to the committee 
process, who would have had the opportunity to examine the effect of 
the numbers in this open door for perhaps 125,000.
  So we can talk about process here, Mr. Speaker, and we can debate 
about the right way to bring legislation through so that we have an 
opportunity to perfect that legislation. But I think the bottom line is 
there's a consequence to this that weighs poorly for the Iraqi people 
in general. And that is if this legislation is technically corrected 
today, if this legislation passes and receives the signature of the 
President and becomes law, perhaps 125,000 Iraqis, perhaps more, can 
come to the United States under a standard that's looser than the 
refugee standard that the Secretary of State has to uphold today, and a 
Nation of about 26 or 27 million people could lose 125,000 of its best 
citizens and its best people. The allies of the United States of 
America and coalition forces, the people who believe the most in 
freedom, those who stepped up and did put their lives on the line, 
those that will be the vitality to rebuild a country that's emerging 
from the surge and continuing day by day, and the numbers and the data 
that we are looking at look more and more optimistic, they need good 
people.
  It's people that are policy. We know that in our own offices. We know 
that

[[Page 9661]]

within our companies. We know that within our own military, within our 
own government. People are policy. Good people in Iraq will rebuild 
Iraq. We need people there. I want to see Americans go there to help. I 
want to see the Iraqi people stay there and rebuild their country. 
That's a high level of patriotism for them to show.
  This is a bill that discourages that and actually works inversely to 
the best interests of the United States and the best interests of Iraq. 
So I urge its defeat.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, again, we have seen ongoing news reports that those who 
have chosen to help us in our efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan are 
risking their lives for our Nation's interests, and it is appropriate 
that we give them assistance.
  This bill is exactly what we thought we had done earlier in the year. 
This is a technical correction. It's not a change in policy. It is what 
we thought we were doing. In fact, I'm surprised we have opposition 
because we didn't think it was controversial. The Senate bill, just to 
read the original cosponsors, the Senate bill was introduced by 
Senators Kennedy and Lugar with bipartisan cosponsorship of Senators 
Leahy, Cornyn, Biden, McCain, Levin, Specter, Obama, Hagel, Durbin, 
Sununu, Cardin, Smith, Coleman, and Bond. An identical bill was 
introduced in the House by the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Zoe 
Lofgren) with original cosponsorship of Mr. Fortenberry, Mr. Conyers, 
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Mr. Skelton, Mr. Hunter, Mr. Berman, Ms. Ros-
Lehtinen, Mr. Blumenauer, Mr. Smith of New Jersey, Mr. Perlmutter, Mr. 
Pence, and Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas.
  Obviously those broad bipartisan cosponsors suggest that this is 
something that should not be controversial, especially when you 
consider it also has the strong support of the Department of Defense, 
the Department of State, and the Department of Homeland Security.
  I would hope, Mr. Speaker, that we adopt the bill and do what we 
thought we were doing in January to protect our friends who have 
protected us.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) that the House suspend the rules 
and pass the Senate bill, S. 2829.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds 
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground 
that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum 
is not present.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be 
postponed.
  The point of no quorum is considered withdrawn.

                          ____________________