[House Report 109-99]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



109th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                     109-99

======================================================================



 
 TO PROVIDE SPECIAL IMMIGRANT STATUS FOR ALIENS SERVING AS TRANSLATORS 
                  WITH THE UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES

                                _______
                                

  May 26, 2005.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

 Mr. Sensenbrenner, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                             MINORITY VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 2293]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

  The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the bill 
(H.R. 2293) to provide special immigrant status for aliens 
serving as translators with the United States Armed Forces, 
having considered the same, reports favorably thereon with an 
amendment and recommends that the bill as amended do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
The Amendment....................................................     2
Purpose and Summary..............................................     2
Background and Need for the Legislation..........................     2
Hearings.........................................................     3
Committee Consideration..........................................     3
Vote of the Committee............................................     3
Committee Oversight Findings.....................................     4
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures........................     4
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................     4
Performance Goals and Objectives.................................     5
Constitutional Authority Statement...............................     5
Section-by-Section Analysis and Discussion.......................     5
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............     6
Markup Transcript................................................     6
Minority Views...................................................    23

                             The Amendment

  The amendment is as follows:
  Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
following:

SECTION 1. SPECIAL IMMIGRANT STATUS FOR PERSONS SERVING AS TRANSLATORS 
                    WITH UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

  (a) In General.--For purposes of the Immigration and Nationality Act 
(8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.), subject to subsection (c)(1), the Secretary of 
Homeland Security may provide an alien described in subsection (b) with 
the status of a special immigrant under section 101(a)(27) of such Act 
(8 U.S.C. 1101(a(27)), if the alien--
          (1) files with the Secretary of Homeland Security a petition 
        under section 204 of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1154) for 
        classification under section 203(b)(4) of such Act (8 U.S.C. 
        1153(b)(4)); and
          (2) is otherwise eligible to receive an immigrant visa and is 
        otherwise admissible to the United States for permanent 
        residence, except in determining such admissibility, the 
        grounds for inadmissibility specified in section 212(a)(4) of 
        such Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(4)) shall not apply.
  (b) Aliens Described.--
          (1) Principal aliens.--An alien is described in this 
        subsection if the alien--
                  (A) is a national of Iraq or Afghanistan;
                  (B) worked directly with United States Armed Forces 
                as a translator for a period of at least 12 months;
                  (C) obtained a favorable written recommendation from 
                the first General or Flag officer in the chain of 
                command of the United States Armed Forces unit that was 
                supported by the alien; and
                  (D) prior to filing the petition described in 
                subsection (a)(1), cleared a background check and 
                screening, as determined by the first General or Flag 
                officer in the chain of command of the United States 
                Armed Forces unit that was supported by the alien.
          (2) Spouses and children.--An alien is described in this 
        subsection if the alien is the spouse or child of a principal 
        alien described in paragraph (1), and is following or 
        accompanying to join the principal alien.
  (c) Numerical Limitations.--
          (1) In general.--The total number of principal aliens who may 
        be provided special immigrant status under this section during 
        any fiscal year shall not exceed 50.
          (2) Counting against special immigrant cap.--For purposes of 
        the application of sections 201 through 203 of the Immigration 
        and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1151-1153) in any fiscal year, 
        aliens eligible to be provided status under this section shall 
        be treated as special immigrants described in section 
        101(a)(27) of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(27)) who are not 
        described in subparagraph (A), (B), (C), or (K) of such 
        section.
  (d) Application of Immigration and Nationality Act Provisions.--The 
definitions in subsections (a) and (b) of section 101 of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101) shall apply in the 
administration of this section.

                          Purpose and Summary

    H.R. 2293 would provide special immigrant status to a 
limited number of Iraqis and Afghanistanis who have served as 
translators for the U.S. Armed Forces.

                Background and Need for the Legislation

    A number of alien translators currently working in Iraq and 
Afghanistan embedded with units of the U.S. Armed Forces are 
providing extremely valuable services. Their cooperation and 
close identification with the U.S. military have put these 
individuals and their families in danger. This danger will only 
escalate after U.S. forces leave or reduce their strength in 
Iraq and Afghanistan. H.R. 2293 would provide immigration 
relief for this small group of brave individuals.
    Under H.R. 2293, permanent resident visas would be 
available to nationals of Iraq or Afghanistan (and their 
spouses and minor children) who have worked directly with the 
U.S. Armed Forces as translators for at least 12 months, who 
have obtained favorable written recommendations from the 
officer in charge of the unit they worked with, and who have 
cleared a background check. No more than 50 principals may 
receive permanent resident status in any fiscal year, and the 
recipients will count towards the 10,000 per year quota of 
special immigrant visas.

                                Hearings

    No hearings were held on H.R. 2293.

                        Committee Consideration

    On May 18, 2005, the Committee met in open session and 
ordered favorably reported the bill H.R. 2293 with amendment by 
a voice vote, a quorum being present.

                         Vote of the Committee

    The Committee adopted H.R. 2293 by voice vote. In 
compliance with clause 3(b) of Rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee notes that the 
following rollcall vote occurred during the Committee's 
consideration of H.R. 2293.
    1. Amendment offered by Mr. Conyers to remove the numerical 
restriction on the special immigrant visas created by this 
bill. The amendment was defeated 10 ayes to 19 nays.

                                                   ROLLCALL NO. 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Ayes            Nays           Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hyde........................................................
Mr. Coble.......................................................                              X
Mr. Smith (Texas)...............................................                              X
Mr. Gallegly....................................................                              X
Mr. Goodlatte...................................................                              X
Mr. Chabot......................................................                              X
Mr. Lungren.....................................................                              X
Mr. Jenkins.....................................................                              X
Mr. Cannon......................................................                              X
Mr. Bachus......................................................
Mr. Inglis......................................................
Mr. Hostettler..................................................                              X
Mr. Green.......................................................                              X
Mr. Keller......................................................                              X
Mr. Issa........................................................                              X
Mr. Flake.......................................................
Mr. Pence.......................................................                              X
Mr. Forbes......................................................                              X
Mr. King........................................................                              X
Mr. Feeney......................................................                              X
Mr. Franks......................................................                              X
Mr. Gohmert.....................................................                              X
Mr. Conyers.....................................................              X
Mr. Berman......................................................
Mr. Boucher.....................................................
Mr. Nadler......................................................              X
Mr. Scott.......................................................              X
Mr. Watt........................................................              X
Ms. Lofgren.....................................................              X
Ms. Jackson Lee.................................................
Ms. Waters......................................................              X
Mr. Meehan......................................................              X
Mr. Delahunt....................................................
Mr. Wexler......................................................
Mr. Weiner......................................................              X
Mr. Schiff......................................................
Ms. Sanchez.....................................................              X
Mr. Smith (Washington)..........................................
Mr. Van Hollen..................................................              X
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Chairman.....................................                              X
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................             10              19
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      Committee Oversight Findings

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of Rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the Committee reports that the 
findings and recommendations of the Committee, based on 
oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) of Rule X of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives, are incorporated in the 
descriptive portions of this report.

               New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures

    Clause 3(c)(2) of Rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives is inapplicable because this legislation does 
not provide new budgetary authority or increased tax 
expenditures.

               Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(3) of Rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the Committee sets forth, with 
respect to the bill, H.R. 2293, the following estimate and 
comparison prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                      Washington, DC, May 24, 2005.
Hon. F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr., Chairman,
Committee on the Judiciary,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 2293, a bill to 
provide special immigrant status for aliens serving as 
translators with the United States Armed Forces.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Mark 
Grabowicz, who can be reached at 226-2860.
            Sincerely,
                                       Douglas Holtz-Eakin.

Enclosure

cc:
        Honorable John Conyers, Jr.
        Ranking Member
H.R. 2293--A bill to provide special immigrant status for aliens 
        serving as translators with the United States Armed Forces.
    H.R. 2293 would allow certain nationals of Iraq or 
Afghanistan who have worked with the United States Armed Forces 
as translators to apply for permanent U.S. residence as special 
immigrants. The bill would limit this opportunity to 50 
individuals, plus their families. Enacting this legislation 
could affect revenues and direct spending by the Bureau of 
Citizenship and Immigration Services, the Department of State, 
and certain Federal assistance programs. Because so few special 
visas would be provided, however, CBO estimates that H.R. 2293 
would have no significant budgetary impact.
    H.R. 2293 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and 
would not affect the budgets of State, local, or tribal 
governments.
    The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Mark Grabowicz, 
who can be reached at 226-2860. This estimate was approved by 
Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget 
Analysis.

                    Performance Goals and Objectives

    The Committee states that pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of 
Rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, H.R. 
2293 would provide special immigrant status to a limited number 
of Iraqis and Afghanistanis who have served as translators for 
the U.S. Armed Forces.

                   Constitutional Authority Statement

    Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of Rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee finds the authority for 
this legislation in article I, section 8, clause 4 of the 
Constitution.

               Section-by-Section Analysis and Discussion

  SEC. 1. SPECIAL IMMIGRANT STATUS FOR PERSONS SERVING AS TRANSLATORS 
                        WITH U.S. ARMED FORCES.

    Subsection (a) of section 1 provides that the Secretary of 
Homeland Security may provide special immigrant status under 
section 101(a)(27) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to an 
alien described in subsection (b) who files with the Secretary 
a petition under section 204 of the INA for classification as a 
special immigrant (under section 203(b)(4) of the INA) and who 
is otherwise eligible to receive an immigrant visa and is 
otherwise admissible (disregarding the public charge ground of 
inadmissibility (found at section 212(a)(4) of the INA)).
    Subsection (b)(1) describes the principal aliens who are 
eligible for special immigrant visas under the bill. An alien 
must: 1) be a national of Iraq or Afghanistan; 2) have worked 
directly with U.S. Armed Forces as a translator for a period of 
at least 12 months; 3) have obtained favorable written 
recommendation from the first General or Flag officer in the 
chain of command of the U.S. Armed Forces unit that was 
supported by the alien; and 4) have cleared a background check 
and screening, as determined by the first General or Flag 
officer in the chain of command of the U.S. Armed Forces unit 
that was supported by the alien (before filing a petition).
    Subsection (b)(2) provides that the spouse and children of 
a principal alien who are following or accompanying to join the 
principal alien are also eligible for special immigrant visas.
    Subsection (c)(1) provides that the total number of 
principal aliens who may be provided special immigrant status 
pursuant to the bill shall not exceed 50 in any fiscal year.
    Subsection (c)(2) provides that aliens eligible to receive 
special immigrant status pursuant to the bill shall be treated 
as special immigrants (as described in section 101(a)(27) of 
the INA, but not described in subparagraphs (A)-(C) or (K)).
    Subsection (d) provides that the definitions in subsections 
(a) and (b) of section 101 of the INA shall apply in the 
administration of this bill.

         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

    In compliance with clause 3(e) of Rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, the Committee notes that this 
bill does not change existing law.

                           Markup Transcript



                            BUSINESS MEETING

                              MAY 18, 2005

                  House of Representatives,
                                Committee on the Judiciary,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:07 a.m., in 
Room 2141, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. F. James 
Sensenbrenner, Jr. [Chairman of the Committee] presiding.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The Committee will be in order. A 
working quorum is present.
    [Intervening business.]
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Now, pursuant to notice, I call up 
H.R. 2293, a bill to provide special immigrant status for 
aliens serving as translators with the United States Armed 
Forces, for purposes of a markup and move its favorable 
recommendation to the House. Without objection, the bill will 
be considered as read and open for amendment at any point.
    [The bill, H.R. 2293, follows:]
    
    
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. And the Chair recognizes the 
gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Hostettler, for 5 minutes for 
purposes of explaining the bill.
    Mr. Hostettler. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I 
move to strike the last word.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentleman is recognized.
    Mr. Hostettler. Today I join with the Ranking Member of the 
Immigration Subcommittee, Sheila Jackson Lee, and the Chairman 
of the Armed Services Committee, Duncan Hunter, to thank the 
Chairman of this Committee for holding a markup of H.R. 2293.
    H.R. 2293 amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to 
admit Afghan and Iraqi nationals who serve U.S. forces as an 
interpreters for at least 12 months and have a recommendation 
of the first general or flag officer in the chain of command. 
The spouse and children of a qualified alien are also eligible 
for admission, and the total number is capped at 50 persons.
    H.R. 2293 would provide a legislative solution to a problem 
that is currently vexing our combat units in Iraq. Presently a 
small number of alien translators are currently embedded with 
our armed forces in Afghanistan and Iraq. These translators and 
their immediate families live in constant danger of death 
because of the key support they render to our combat forces. 
Our ground commanders have expressed a desire to help these 
translators come to the U.S. with their immediate families. The 
justification for H.R. 2293 has best been summed up by a Marine 
attorney serving in Iraq who had the following to say: ``The 
reason our translators are seeking U.S. citizenship is because 
they fear that their lives will be in jeopardy when we pull out 
of Iraq because of how closely they've worked with both the 
82nd Airborne Division last year and with our battalion this 
year. I believe that there is a need for us to do something to 
protect the lives of some of the people who have put their 
lives on the line to help us with our mission in Iraq. I 
realize that some people that are not as close to these 
individuals might be concerned with security in allowing a 
terrorist type into our country. However, I believe that the 
battalion's members are the people in the best position to make 
that determination. The reason I say that is because these 
interpreters have been living with us at our camp in our living 
quarters and eating chow with us every day since we've been 
here. They go out to the field with us. They have fought 
alongside us. They've shed blood with us. And they've sat in 
fighting holes with us during combat operations. Because of all 
of those reasons, our Marines and my battalion commander are in 
the best position to know who is deserving and whom we can 
trust to bring to the United States.''
    ``As a side note, some of the officers and enlisted Marines 
in my battalion feel so strongly about this issue that they 
have already offered up their homes for these Iraqi translators 
to stay in when they come to the United States until they have 
enough time to settle in and find a place of their own.''
    This proposal does not create or change any entitlement or 
require funding. I thank the Chairman for his attention and 
swift action on this important issue that directly impacts the 
effectiveness of our fighting men and women, as well as the 
welfare of the foreign nationals who have aided them. And I 
yield back the balance of my time.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentleman from Michigan.
    Mr. Conyers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    This is a very troublesome matter. Can someone explain to 
me why we limit it to the first 50 translators? I yield to the 
gentleman.
    Mr. Hostettler. Would the gentleman yield? The number 50 is 
a number that has been given to us by the folks in the field to 
reflect the appropriate number of individuals, including family 
members, that will be affected by this provision at this time. 
I yield back.
    Mr. Conyers. Well, what about the people from Afghanistan 
and Iraq who are not translators but are doing very dangerous 
work of supporting us militarily in the field here? I mean, 
this is like one small group not to exceed 50 who will be given 
special consideration by law. And so I don't think this is an 
indication of very sound policy.
    The ones that are risking their lives as much or more than 
the interpreters are all excluded, and they may be just as 
loyal and just as supportive as the translators themselves.
    What about undercover informants? For many drivers who 
carry U.S. Government employees across dangerous areas in both 
countries? What about translators that are working in other 
parts of our military operation or in the State Department or 
USAID or Agriculture, or even in the nuclear specialist area? 
What about foreign nationals working for other U.S. Government 
agencies going--who are doing work critically important to 
establish democracy and rebuild these nations?
    This is not the kind of policy that was pursued when we 
came out of Vietnam. We didn't limit it to translators. We 
limited it to those who were fighting and risking their lives 
and taking undue chances in supporting us. And so what we're 
saying is that the first 50 will get a break here, and the rest 
of them--and I shudder if we only have 50 translators between 
two nations. That probably explains what's been happening over 
there more clearly than anything else. I suggest that we 
quadruple the number of translators as an amendment to this 
bill and at least get the numbers up for those who might be 
eligible.
    Please, let's not show this kind of limited generosity so 
that those who number 51 and higher won't be told, well, of 
course, we were thinking about you translators, but we didn't 
mean everybody that risked their lives, we only meant the first 
50. And that is the reservations that I have about the measure 
that is before us.
    I return my time.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Without objection, all Members may 
include opening statements in the record at this point.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Jackson Lee follows:]

       Prepared Statement of the Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee, a 
           Representative in Congress from the State of Texas

    I am cosponsoring H.R. 2293 with my distinguished colleague, the 
gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Hostettler. H.R. 2293 would provide special 
immigrant status for a limited number of Iraqis and Afghanistanis who 
have served as translators for the U.S. Armed Forces.
    The translators are providing services for our combat forces in 
Iraq. According to the Marines who work with them, the translators and 
their immediate families live in constant danger of death because of 
the key support they are providing for our combat forces. The Marine 
commanders have expressed a desire to help them to come to the U.S. 
with their immediate families. The commanders believe that the lives of 
the translators will be in even greater jeopardy when the Marines 
withdraw from Iraq.
    The translators have gone far beyond just providing translation 
services. They stay with the Marines in their camp, in the same living 
quarters, and eat chow with the soldiers every day. They go into the 
field with the Marines. They have fought along side of them and shed 
blood with them during combat operations. Some of the Marines feel so 
strongly about helping the translators that they have offered to take 
them into their homes in the United States until they have had enough 
time to settle in and find places of their own.
    H.R. 2293 would make permanent resident visas available to 
nationals of Iraq and Afghanistan (and their spouses and minor 
children) who have worked directly with U.S. Armed Forces as 
translators for at least 12 months, who have obtained favorable written 
recommendations from the officer in charge of the unit they worked 
with, and who have cleared a background check. No more than 50 
principals would be eligible to receive permanent resident status. The 
recipients would count towards the 10,000-per-year quota of special 
immigrant visas.
    I am pleased that we can offer permanent resident status to such 
deserving immigrants with a bipartisan bill. I urge you to vote for 
H.R. 2293. Thank you.

    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Are there amendments?
    Mr. Nadler. Mr. Chairman?
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentleman from New York.
    Mr. Nadler. I don't have an amendment, but I move to strike 
the last word.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentleman is recognized for 5 
minutes.
    Mr. Nadler. Thank you, Mr. Speaker--Mr. Chairman, rather. 
This bill calls for special immigrant status for Iraqi or 
Afghani nationals who have served as translators in the United 
States Armed Forces. This bill is a direct--perhaps if Mr. 
Conyers' observations are correct, not quite adequate, but a 
direct response to the critical need for translators and 
linguists in our military.
    This interpreter shortage is well documented. The 9/11 
Commission report stated that the Government ``lacked 
sufficient translators proficient in Arabic and other key 
languages, resulting in a significant backlog of untranslated 
intercepts.''
    A 2002 GAO study concluded that staff shortages in Arabic 
and Farsi ``adversely affected agency operations and 
compromised U.S. military, law enforcement, intelligence, 
counterintelligence, and diplomatic efforts.''
    A Justice Department IG's report released in September 2004 
said the Government ``cannot translate all the foreign language 
counterterrorism and counterintelligence material it collects, 
due largely to inadequate translation capabilities in languages 
primarily related to counterterrorism activities'' such as 
Arabic and Farsi.
    The shortage of Arabic translators in Iraq and Afghanistan 
has made it harder for U.S. soldiers to protect themselves and 
has jeopardized interrogations of suspected al Qaeda terrorists 
in U.S. custody. I commend the author of this legislation and 
the Chairman of this Committee for their willingness to open 
the immigration doors to Arabic linguists serving as 
translators with the U.S. Armed Services--Armed Forces. Yet the 
answer to this dire need is not only to give U.S. citizenship 
to Iraqis and Afghanis, but also to stop discriminating against 
American citizens who are ready to serve their country loyally 
as Arabic translators but are refused permission to do so.
    It is no coincidence that this bill would create 50 spots 
for Iraqi and Afghani nationals, almost the exact number of 
linguists who have been discharged from the armed forces under 
the ``don't ask, don't tell'' law since 1994 because they are 
gay. Fifty-four Arabic and nine Persian Iranian, including 
Farsi people, have been discharged under this policy. Because 
of ``don't ask, don't tell,'' the military continues to devote 
its resources to rooting out patriotic gay Americans whose 
service is central to the war on terror. And this is no excuse, 
and I don't want to hear anything here about unit cohesion. 
These people are translators.
    This is another example of the way in which ``don't ask, 
don't tell'' is not in the best interest of our national 
security. And this Congress says, ``Don't ask, don't tell, and 
for heaven's sake, don't translate.''
    Given the willingness of the author of this amendment and 
the Chairman of this Committee to think creatively to solve the 
need for Arabic and Farsi linguists to help in the war on 
terror, I hope we will recognize the fundamental rights of 
American citizens and repeal the unfortunate and incredibly 
self-defeating policy of ``don't ask, don't tell.''
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Are there amendments?
    Mr. Conyers. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the 
desk.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The clerk will report the 
amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment to H.R. 2293 offered by Mr.----
    Mr. Hostettler. Mr. Chairman?
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentleman from Indiana?
    Mr. Hostettler. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. A point of order is reserved on the 
amendment.
    The Clerk. Page 3, strike line 12----
    Mr. Conyers. I ask unanimous consent the amendment be 
considered as read.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Without objection, so ordered. 
Subject to the reservation of the gentleman from Indiana.
    [The amendment follows:]
    
    
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentleman from Michigan is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Conyers. Since we have the measure before us, Members 
of the Committee, there might be three changes that could make 
it more acceptable.
    First, of course, is to get rid of the 50-person cap on the 
number of persons who can receive special immigrant status 
under the bill.
    Secondly--and this hasn't been stated yet--but it would 
ensure that any visas granted under this act would be given 
outside of the annual limit on special immigrant visas, the 
worldwide ceiling, and the per country ceilings on visas, which 
at this moment, unless we accept this amendment, is applied, 
these 50 would be deducted from these three categories.
    And, finally, it would open--this amendment would open up 
these visas so that they're not available just to translators 
but also to very important others who provide important 
assistance to the United States Armed Forces or other U.S. 
personnel.
    The least we can do is be a little bit more democratic as 
to who would be the beneficiaries of this special immigrant 
status, and with these three changes, I think--I don't think. I 
would support the amendment, and I urge the Members to 
seriously consider these changes to make this at least a bill 
that won't be the object of much commerce and joking around, 
because it really--it really defies imagination that the first 
50 translators would get a special status and everybody else 
doing their job in this incredible struggle in the Middle East 
would be subject to the regular immigration laws. I urge 
support of the amendment.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Does the gentleman from Indiana 
insist on his point of order?
    Mr. Hostettler. Yes, I do, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentleman is recognized. State 
your point of order.
    Mr. Hostettler. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order that 
the amendment is not germane under House Rule XVI. The 
amendment is not germane to the fundamental purpose of the 
bill, that is, military translators, and thus fails for lack of 
germaneness.
    Moreover, the amendment is outside the scope of the 
underlying bill and is thus not germane.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Does the gentleman from Michigan 
wish to be heard on the point of order?
    Mr. Conyers. Mr. Chairman, I do.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentleman is recognized.
    Mr. Conyers. I would like to merely indicate that I would--
to take it completely out of the germaneness argument, I'd be 
willing to strike the whole provision with the exception of 
lifting the cap on--the ceiling----
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Does the gentleman concede the 
point of order and wish to reintroduce the amendment without 
the provisions that are objected to?
    Mr. Conyers. I do, and----
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Okay. The point of order is 
conceded and sustained. The gentleman from Michigan wishes to 
offer a second amendment, which the clerk will report.
    The Clerk. Amendment to H.R. 2293, offered by Mr. Conyers.
    Mr. Conyers. I ask unanimous consent the amendment be 
considered as read.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Without objection, the amendment 
that the gentleman is offering is the same amendment that deals 
with striking line 12 through 24 on page 3, but does not strike 
line 17 and all that follows through page 3, line 6 on 
qualifying services. Is the Chair correct?
    Mr. Conyers. The Chair is correct.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Without objection, the amendment is 
considered as read.
    [The amendment follows:]

    
    
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. And the gentleman from Michigan is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Conyers. Mr. Chairman, what I present now is merely the 
main point that we would strike the 50-person cap on the number 
of persons who can receive special immigrant status under the 
bill, and not have those numbers taken from outside the annual 
limit on special immigrant visas, the worldwide ceiling, or the 
per country ceilings on visas.
    In other words, we would at least allow more than 50 
people, if there were that many--and let us all pray that there 
are more than 50 translators in two countries struck by war--
that they would be able to enjoy the provisions of this special 
immigrant status. And I return any time.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentleman from Indiana, Mr. 
Hostettler. Does the gentleman from Indiana seek recognition?
    Mr. Hostettler. Yes.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentleman is recognized for 5 
minutes.
    Mr. Hostettler. Mr. Chairman, the cap that has been placed 
on this provision is a reasonable cap, according to the U.S. 
Marine Corps and others who are involved in this process. If 
there is a purpose, a reason for us to allow for more 
individuals to be made under this--to make provision for more 
individuals, we can always revisit that. But at this time it is 
unnecessary to increase the cap over the----
    Mr. Conyers. Could the Chairman--could the Ranking Member 
yield to me?
    Mr. Nadler. Mr. Chairman?
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The time belongs to the gentleman 
from Indiana, Mr. Hostettler. Do you yield to the gentleman 
from Michigan?
    Mr. Hostettler. I will yield.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentleman from Michigan.
    Mr. Conyers. I thank you. Surely, Mr. Hostettler, you are 
very much aware of how difficult changing immigration law is as 
a Member of this Committee. The likelihood of us revisiting 
this to find out that there are a couple hundred people 
eligible I don't think is very good, if this were ever to 
become law, and that's why--let's change it now. If, in fact, 
there are not more than 50, then nobody will be hurt by us 
making this change.
    Mr. Hostettler. Reclaiming my time, and I understand the 
gentleman's point that--and I would agree with him. As a 
general rule, it is somewhat difficult to change immigration 
law, but given the time that has lapsed since this request was 
first brought to the Committee and to the Chairman and the time 
of the marking up of this bill, this is one of those areas of 
immigration law that has significant support, and if we need to 
revisit it, I think that this will fall out of the normal MO 
for immigration law, and we can revisit it and change it just 
as quickly. And I yield back the----
    Mr. Cannon. Would the gentleman yield, Mr. Hostettler?
    Mr. Hostettler. Well, I yield to the gentleman from Utah.
    Mr. Cannon. Thank you. I'm just trying to clarify. Are we 
talking--with the new amendment, we're only talking about 
translators, right?
    Mr. Hostettler. That's correct.
    Mr. Cannon. And is 50 a generous number, do you know? Or 
what if we end up with 55 or we're there for longer and we end 
up with 70 or something? I'm just wondering why--in the first 
place, how clear is the number 50? And could we maybe save some 
problem without creating a big loophole by going with this 
amendment?
    Mr. Hostettler. Reclaiming my time, the number 50 is an 
adequate number, according to the folks in the field.
    Mr. Cannon. But would that--does it do harm to the 
underlying concept to change a hard 50 to a number that may 
adjust over time without us--I mean, does this do significant 
damage to the underlying concept of----
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Will the gentleman from Indiana 
yield?
    Mr. Hostettler. I will yield to the Chair?
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. My reading of the bill indicates 
that the limit is 50 per year.
    Mr. Hostettler. Yes.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. It's an annual cap of 50. I would 
argue against the amendment of the gentleman from Michigan 
because if we make it unlimited, then they might be without 
translators as all of them would apply to come and it would put 
the flag officer who is responsible for signing off in a real 
untenable position in making a decision, whereas he could tell 
some that they could wait until next year.
    I yield back to the gentleman from Indiana.
    Mr. Hostettler. I yield back the balance of my time.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The question is on the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Conyers. Those in 
favor will say aye? Opposed, no?
    The noes appear to have it.
    Mr. Conyers. Mr. Chairman, I would like a record vote on 
this amendment.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. A record vote will be ordered. The 
question is on agreeing to the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Conyers. Those in favor will as 
your names are called answer aye, those opposed no, and the 
clerk will call the roll.
    The Clerk. Mr. Hyde?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Coble?
    Mr. Coble. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Coble, no. Mr. Smith?
    Mr. Smith of Texas. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Smith, no. Mr. Gallegly?
    Mr. Gallegly. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Gallegly, no. Mr. Goodlatte?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Chabot?
    Mr. Chabot. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chabot, no. Mr. Lungren?
    Mr. Lungren. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Lungren, no. Mr. Jenkins?
    Mr. Jenkins. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Jenkins, no. Mr. Cannon?
    Mr. Cannon. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Cannon, no. Mr. Bachus?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Inglis?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Hostettler?
    Mr. Hostettler. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Hostettler, no. Mr. Green?
    Mr. Green. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Green, no. Mr. Keller?
    Mr. Keller. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Keller, no. Mr. Issa?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Flake?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Pence?
    Mr. Pence. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Pence, no. Mr. Forbes?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. King?
    Mr. King. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. King, no. Mr. Feeney?
    Mr. Feeney. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Feeney, no. Mr. Franks?
    Mr. Franks. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Franks, no. Mr. Gohmert?
    Mr. Gohmert. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Gohmert, no. Mr. Conyers?
    Mr. Conyers. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Conyers, aye. Mr. Berman?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Boucher?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Nadler?
    Mr. Nadler. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Nadler, aye. Mr. Scott?
    Mr. Scott. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Scott, aye. Mr. Watt?
    Mr. Watt. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Watt, aye. Ms. Lofgren?
    Ms. Lofgren. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Lofgren, aye. Ms. Jackson Lee?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Ms. Waters?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Meehan?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Delahunt?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Wexler?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Weiner?
    Mr. Weiner. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Weiner, aye. Mr. Schiff?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Ms. Sanchez?
    Ms. Sanchez. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Sanchez, aye. Mr. Smith?
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Van Hollen?
    Mr. Van Hollen. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Van Hollen, aye. Mr. Chairman?
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, no.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Members who wish to cast or change 
their votes? The gentlewoman from California, Ms. Waters.
    Ms. Waters. Aye.
    The Clerk. Ms. Waters, aye.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentleman from California, Mr. 
Issa.
    Mr. Issa. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Issa, no.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentleman from Virginia, Mr. 
Forbes.
    Mr. Forbes. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Forbes, no.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentleman from Massachusetts, 
Mr. Meehan.
    Mr. Meehan. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Meehan, aye.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentleman from Virginia, Mr. 
Goodlatte.
    Mr. Goodlatte. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Goodlatte, no.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Further Members who wish to cast or 
change their votes? If none, the clerk will report.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, there are 10 ayes and 19 noes.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. And the amendment is not agreed to.
    Are there further amendments? If there are no further 
amendments, a reporting quorum is present. The question occurs 
on the motion to report the bill H.R. 2293 favorably. All those 
in favor will say aye? Opposed, no?
    The ayes appear to have it. The ayes have it. The motion to 
report favorably is agreed to. Without objection, the staff is 
directed to make any technical and conforming changes, and all 
Members will be given 2 days as provided by House rules in 
which to submit additional, dissenting, supplemental, or 
minority views.
    [Intervening business.]
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The Committee stands adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 11:41 a.m., the Committee adjourned.]

                             Minority Views

    In every war we fight on foreign soil, some citizens of 
those countries are willing to take a stand against tyranny and 
to stand up for democracy, by working in countless ways to help 
advance our military, political and reconstructive efforts. In 
the past, Congress has passed immigration laws to ensure that 
foreign nationals who perform important services for us during 
our occupation of foreign countries are able to relocate to the 
United States. Often, they risk their lives to work for the 
American military, or our diplomatic and development agencies. 
Repaying their sacrifices by offering them the opportunity to 
become American citizens, and sometimes literally saving their 
lives, is a just and fair policy.
    We support the general principles and policies underlying 
this bill, but we are disappointed that the majority was 
unwilling to broaden this bill to cover other foreign nationals 
who work with U.S. government operations in Iraq and 
Afghanistan.
    When we pulled out of Vietnam, Vietnamese citizens who 
worked for our government, and their families, were at great 
risk of being killed if they remained in Vietnam. We responded 
by giving them the opportunity to come to the United States and 
resettle here with permanent residency. That was the right 
thing to do. The same principle was correctly applied to 
nationals from Laos and Cambodia.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Prior to the passage of the Refugee Act of 1980, refugees from 
the Indo-Chinese peninsula came and were brought to the U.S. and were 
admitted as ``public interest parolees.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Unfortunately, in its present form, this bill does not 
replicate that sound policy. After rushing this country into a 
war in Iraq, and pursuing aggressors in Afghanistan, the 
proponents of this legislation now suggest that translators for 
our Armed Forces need to be rescued from our democratic 
experiment in the Middle East. Neither country has fallen to 
terrorists or insurgents. We are not pulling out of our 
engagements in these nations. Yet the originator of this bill, 
Chairman Duncan Hunter of the Committee on Armed Services, 
wants to bring translators here now. Surely, we still need 
these translators in Iraq and Afghanistan. This bill sends a 
misguided message to the world that these nations are so 
dangerous that we must, in essence, grant blanket asylum from 
our own experiment in democracy.
    Beyond that general concern, the legislation is so narrowly 
drafted and unreasonably rigid that it excludes many deserving 
foreign nationals. For example, the bill only allows 50 
translators to come to the U.S. and it does not define who 
qualifies as a translator, other than saying that the person 
must work with (not even for) the U.S. Armed Forces for 12 
months. On this basis, permanent residency can be handed out to 
personal friends or others who should not necessarily qualify 
but may be politically well-connected. Qualifying translators 
may still be denied the opportunity to relocate here under this 
language.
    This unwise and arbitrary limitation to 50 visas should be 
stricken. Experience has taught us that arbitrary caps in 
immigration law are nearly impossible to adjust or repeal when 
it turns out that the cap does not cover all of the people who 
rightly qualify for the visa.\2\ It is important that we 
correct this error now. Such caps often leave many deserving 
people shut out of immigration benefits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ Public interest parolees (PIPs) who arrived mostly in the 
1970's and 1980's from Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia following the wars 
there were unable to become permanent residents. These people were 
marginalized and were unable to take advantage of many opportunities in 
the U.S. as a result. Finally, in 2001, Congress changed the law to 
allow PIPs to adjust their status to permanent residency. See the 
Foreign Operations Appropriations Act of 2001, P.L. 106-429, Sec. 101A. 
However, many were unable to adjust. The benefit was capped at 4000 
immigrants, although more than 4000 people meeting the qualification 
standards were living in the U.S. as parolees at the time. The cap was 
finally lifted in the Consolidated Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 
2005, P.L. 108-447, Division D, Sec. 534(m).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Unfortunately, the United States government may be engaged 
in both Iraq and Afghanistan for many more years to come. We 
cannot predict with any certainty that only 50 people in those 
two countries will render the type of assistance to our 
government that makes them worthy of this benefit. Nor should 
we randomly shut the door after 50 applicants come forward. If 
the beneficiaries of this bill have provided life-sustaining 
assistance to United States Armed Forces, as the proponents of 
this bill would argue, then surely the 51st and 52nd applicant 
is just as worthy of relief as the first.
    H.R. 2293 also reduces the total number of special 
immigrant visas available to qualifying individuals. Yet there 
is ample precedent for providing increased visas for 
populations of deserving immigrants outside of existing 
numerical caps. This was done most recently with H-1B visas 
\3\, H-2B visas \4\, and Australian visas.\5\ Without lifting 
these caps, other deserving immigrants who have been waiting 
for visas or who may desperately need them (such as child 
victims of abuse, neglect or abandonment) will be unable to get 
a visa because their slots will have been used by Iraqi or 
Afghan translators for the U.S. Armed Forces.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ See the Consolidated Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2005, 
Division J, Title IV, Subtitle B, Sec. 108-447.
    \4\ See the Real I.D. Act of 2005 in the Emergency Supplemental 
Appropriation for Defense, the Global War on Terror and Tsunami Relief 
for Fiscal Year 2005, Division B, Sec. 405, P.L. 109-13.
    \5\ Id at Sec. 501.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Most importantly, this bill does not provide any benefits 
for many of the Iraqis and Afghans who are risking their lives 
for our nation's interests. There is no offer of permanent 
residency for undercover informants. No benefit for the many 
drivers who carry U.S. government employees across dangerous 
areas in these countries, risking their lives every day. There 
is no reason to exclude translators who are working for other 
U.S. government agencies in these countries--the State 
Department, USAID, the Agriculture Department, or our nuclear 
specialists, for example. Certainly, hundreds of foreign 
nationals are doing work that is critically important to our 
efforts to establish democracy and rebuild these nations. They 
may be targeted for reprisals from insurgents due to their 
connections with U.S. employees or agencies and killed, yet, we 
are unwilling to open our doors to anyone other than Armed 
Forces translators.
    H.R. 2293 only benefits Iraqi and Afghan translators for 
the U.S. Armed Forces because Chairman Hunter agreed to move 
the legislation at the request of the U.S. Marine Corps. There 
is no logical reason why the bill, and the benefit of permanent 
residency, should be limited to military translators. The 
Conyers amendment that was offered in Committee would expand 
potential beneficiaries so that others who provide important 
assistance to U.S. Armed Forces, or other U.S. personnel, would 
be eligible for special immigrant visas.
    Certainly translators provide an important service to our 
personnel on the ground in these countries. However, Afghans 
and Iraqis assist with other important jobs as well. The 
opportunity to relocate to the U.S. should be extended to 
drivers who risk their lives for U.S. personnel on every road 
trip, foreign nationals assisting USAID personnel in 
development projects, and individuals who provide critical 
intelligence information that protects our troops and assists 
our military efforts.
    The bill requires that translators must have worked with 
the U.S. Armed Forces for 12 months. The amendment would allow 
the Secretary of Homeland Security to waive a portion of that 
work requirement in extraordinary circumstances. A translator 
who saves the life of a U.S. Marine, or provides some other 
critical assistance in his fourth month of work with our 
military should be able to take advantage of this visa program 
now. If his acts have made him a target of our opponents, his 
life may be endangered, but the rigidity of this statutory 
language would prevent us from assisting him under this 
statute.
    The amendment would still require that the provision be 
applied to someone who has worked for or with the U.S. 
government. It could not be applied to someone who has no work 
or service relationship with a U.S. government entity. The 
waiver would be made in consultation with the Secretary, 
Director or chief officer of the U.S. government agency or 
department for which the alien worked
    The bill requires that applicants pass a background check 
and screening, as determined by the appropriate military 
officer, before they can apply for this visa. This sets up a 
system where different standards may be applied to different 
people. In addition, the military may not have appropriate 
screening processes, or their processes may not cover the same 
issues or concerns that need to be addressed for immigration 
purposes. The amendment calls on the Secretary of Homeland 
Security to establish these standards so that they will be 
appropriate for newly arriving permanent residents and so that 
they will be uniformly applied to applicants
    This bill contains the seed of a good idea. But the 
arbitrary cap, the reduction of special immigrant visas, and 
the restriction to Armed Forces translators should be corrected 
before this legislation is sent to the full House for its 
consideration.
    If we want to show our gratitude, and ensure their safely 
of our friends from reprisals, we should pass a bill that 
really helps the many people who are risking their lives for 
Americans and U.S. policy in Iraq and Afghanistan, not a select 
or favorite few.
Description of Amendments Offered by Democratic Members
    During the markup one amendment was offered by one 
Democratic Member, Mr. Conyers.
    1. Conyers Amendment

      of Amendment: The amendment would make the 
following changes to the bill: (i) strike the 50-person cap on 
the number of persons who can receive special immigrant status; 
(ii) ensure that any visas granted would be given outside of 
the annual limit on special immigrant visas, the worldwide 
ceiling, and per-country ceilings on visas; (iii) make these 
visas available not only to translators, but also to others who 
provide important assistance to U.S. Armed Forces or other U.S. 
personnel; and (iv) permit a partial waiver of the work 
requirement and require the Department of Homeland Security to 
establish processes for background clearances of the 
applicants.

      Vote on Amendment: The amendment was defeated on a voice 
vote.

                                   John Conyers, Jr.
                                   Howard L. Berman.
                                   Sheila Jackson Lee.
                                   Maxine Waters.
                                   Chris Van Hollen.

                                  
