Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act - Motion to Proceed

PROTECTION OF LAWFUL COMMERCE IN ARMS ACT--MOTION TO PROCEED -- (Senate - July 26, 2005)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I know we are currently debating the motion to proceed on S. 397, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. I am supportive of this legislation. I am happy to see 65 of my colleagues join me in invoking cloture today so we can reach resolution on the bill later this week. This is critical legislation for gun manufacturers, some of whom work in my State and employ hard-working Texans. It is important for our economy and for our national security. I plan to speak about this issue in greater detail later, but I wanted to take a few moments to address another urgent matter.

I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business, and that the time be discounted against the 30 hours.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

IMMIGRATION REFORM

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, earlier today, Chairman Specter of the Senate Judiciary Committee convened a very important hearing addressing one of the most urgent matters confronting our Nation; that is, the need to fix our broken immigration system. I want to speak a few minutes about a proposal that I have made, along with my colleague from Arizona, Senator Kyl, together representing two border States, ones that perhaps have the most experience with this issue because of our proximity to the border with Mexico.

In summary, this bill strengthens our border enforcement while it comprehensively reforms our immigration system. Unfortunately, the ongoing immigration debate has too often divided Americans of goodwill into two camps--those who are angry and frustrated by our failure to enforce the law, and those who are angry and frustrated that our immigration laws do not reflect reality. I have learned that those two groups, both of whom deeply care about America and are committed to building a system that works, share more in common than they or many other people actually realize. The only groups who benefit from the current system are human smugglers, unscrupulous employers, and others who profit at the expense of people who are trying to come into this country and work through illegal channels. Unfortunately, we know that those channels are being investigated and potentially exploited by those who want to come here to do us harm.

The reality is we need both stronger enforcement and reasonable reform of our immigration laws. It is my opinion that we, in the past, have not devoted the funds, the resources, or the manpower necessary to enforce our immigration laws or to protect our borders. No discussion of reform is possible without a clear commitment to--and a substantial escalation of--our efforts to enforce the law.

Over a series of months now, as chairman of the Immigration Subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee, I have come to believe that increased

enforcement alone cannot solve the problem. Any reform proposal must both serve our national security and our national economy. It must be capable of securing our country, but it must also be compatible with our growing economy.

As I mentioned a moment ago, as chairman of the Subcommittee on Immigration, I have worked closely with Senator Kyl, who chairs the Terrorism Subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee, to conduct a thorough review of our Nation's immigration laws. We have covered a wide variety of subjects, and we have had the opportunity to hear from a diverse group of experts. From an analysis of how the immigration system failed on 9/11, to the role of our neighboring countries in raising living standards in their home countries, our hearings have laid a foundation upon which we have developed a comprehensive solution, one that will not result in yet another immigration crisis some 10 or 20 years down the road.

We all know our immigration system has been broken for many years. First, the volume of illegal immigration continues to increase. According to the Pew Hispanic Center, there has been a dramatic increase in illegal immigration since 9/11, approximately 30% since 2000. That same organization estimates there are approximately 10.3 million illegal aliens in the United States currently.

Over the course of the 1990s, the number of illegal aliens increased by half a million a year, almost matching the number of visas that Congress has made available for legal immigrants. Last year alone, the Border Patrol detained roughly 1.1 million aliens who had come across the border. Professionals I have talked with on my travels to Texas and along the border, people whose experience and professionalism I trust, estimate that we are only detaining perhaps one out of every three or one out of every four people who are coming across our borders illegally.

Second, and for me the most alarming, is the information that suggests that terrorists and other criminals, including smugglers, are aware of the holes in our system. They may be--and I am confident that they are--looking at ways to exploit these weaknesses.

In recent visits in McAllen, TX, and Laredo, TX, I learned from people who have been long familiar with the movement of people back and forwards across our borders that the nature of illegal immigration has changed dramatically. The number of aliens from noncontiguous countries, sometimes called OTMs--in other words, people from countries other than Mexico--has doubled in the last year alone. Already this year the Department of Homeland Security has apprehended about 100,000 aliens across the southern border who are from noncontiguous countries.

While many of these individuals are coming from countries that you would expect, countries in Central and South America, many come from countries that have direct connections with terrorism. For example, we know that the Border Patrol has apprehended at least 400 aliens from countries with direct ties to terrorism.

Former Deputy Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Admiral James Loy, stated that ``entrenched human smuggling networks and corruption in areas beyond our boarders can be exploited by terrorist organizations.'' He went on to state that ``several al-Qaeda leaders believe operatives can pay their way into the country through Mexico and also believe that illegal entry is more advantageous than legal entry for operational security reasons.''

I believe the vast majority of the people who come to this country, even those who come outside of our laws, come here for understandable reasons. That is, people who have no hope and no opportunity where they live see this tremendous beacon of opportunity that America represents, and they want to come here to work and provide for their families.

At the same time, we have to acknowledge that our porous borders represent a national security vulnerability which can also be exploited by international terrorists. We know the current system benefits smugglers and all too frequently leads to the deaths of immigrants whose only crime was trying to find a better life for themselves and their families. Indeed, the greatest hazard to people who come to this country to find work is the fact that they have to, under current law, resort too often to an illegal entry into the country. They turn their lives over to people who care nothing about them and who are willing to leave them to die under the most extraordinarily bad circumstances. They must work for employers who can exploit them because they know they can't report labor law violations to the authorities. And they suffer criminal acts, such as domestic violence, and they must endure these acts because they believe they can't report the crime to law enforcement authorities or else they risk deportation.

I believe a reform proposal must encourage aliens to participate in the legal process, to live within the law. Ultimately, after they have completed their time of work in this country, most will return home to their countries and to their families and to contribute to their societies in their homeland. And those who decide to live permanently must enter through the legal process.

When people who come to this country live outside of the law, they are vulnerable to exploitation and violence. They risk their lives, sometimes just to visit their families. I believe we must take away this black market from smugglers and others who exploit these vulnerable immigrants by addressing deficiencies in our current system.

Identifying problems, of course, is not the most difficult part of our jobs. If this were easy, someone would have already done it. It is not easy, but it merits our best efforts. The challenge that Senator Kyl and I have assumed is to find a solution, to find workable results.

Last Wednesday, we introduced the Comprehensive Enforcement and Immigration Reform Act of 2005, a bill that we believe will restore America's faith in lawful immigration and will meet the needs of our country, both from a security perspective and from the standpoint of our growing economy which needs the work provided by many immigrants.

The bill is based upon certain principles. First, we have to reestablish the rule of law. Second, we have to enact laws that are capable of strong enforcement. That means they have to be realistic. Third, and most importantly, the law must be fair. If we address deficiencies in the current immigration process, then we must require that everyone who is here, even those who have come here just to provide for their families, must go through normal legal channels.

The good news is that our bill provides them a direction and a way to do that in a way that is not overly disruptive of their employment or of their family life. We believe it provides a path so that they can regain their status as legal temporary workers or, if eligible, as legal permanent residents.

The men and women who secure our borders at the ports of entry, and frequently at remote locations, should be commended for the job they do every day. But we have not provided them with the resources they need to be able to give them any reasonable chance of success.

Last week, the Senate approved the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill, which, to the credit of the Senator from New Hampshire, Senator Gregg, included increases for border security and immigration enforcement.

Senator Kyl and I have introduced a bill that we believe builds on that foundation. First of all, it authorizes 1,250 new Customs and border protection officers over the next 5 years. It calls on the Department of Homeland Security to hire 10,000 new Border Patrol agents over that same 5-year period. That same amount was authorized by Congress in the Intelligence Reform Act of 2004. It calls for the expansion of a process called expedited removal, which is a fair and effective system for quickly removing those who are ineligible to enter our country. Right now, we only use expedited removal in a few locations along the border. But our bill calls for the Department of Homeland Security to expand that process to all Border Patrol sectors, and we also provide for additional safeguards for aliens by requiring a supervisory official with the Government sign off on any removal.

Let me say a quick word about expedited removal. Right now, because of a lack of detention facilities, we have what is commonly called a ``catch and release'' program. For those we catch coming across the border illegally, a criminal background check is done to determine whether they are a threat to the American people; but if they don't appear on one of these watch lists or criminal background databases, they are released into the U.S. and asked to return for a hearing. It should not surprise any of us that this ``catch and release'' program results in more people not showing up than do show up, and those who show up for their hearing and are ordered removed then do not show up later when they are asked to report for their deportation process.

So that is the problem that we simply have to remedy. And I believe that expansion of the expedited removal process will deal with it in a way that is consistent with our laws and our values and our need for an effective border security program.

Our bill also addresses the release of aliens who come into the country from countries other than Mexico. It raises the minimum bond amounts for these aliens from $1,500 to $5,000. That means that fewer people from countries other than Mexico will be released, and those who are released will have a greater incentive to appear for their hearings.

Another important component of immigration reform is interior enforcement. We also need to deal with those who make it past the border and into the interior of our Nation. Tackling illegal immigration cannot be done in a piecemeal fashion. If we increase our ability to apprehend illegal aliens at the border, we must have a place to put them. Once detained, lawyers and judges are necessary to ensure that these people receive timely and fair hearings. Reform, therefore, must evaluate the whole enforcement process, and we must remove obstacles that appear anywhere in the process.

The goal is simple: If we apprehend someone who has no legal right to be in this country and is not entitled to any claim of asylum, then we must have an effective and efficient means to remove them from the U.S.

The bill Senator Kyl and I have introduced will restore confidence in the system. First, it authorizes an additional 10,000 detention beds. Currently, there are only 23,000 detention beds. You will recall that a moment ago I said last year alone immigration control authorities apprehended 1.1 million people coming across our border illegally. Yet we only have 23,000 detention beds. That leads to what I described earlier as the ``catch and release'' program, which has proven to be completely unworkable.

The intelligence reform bill called for an additional 40,000 beds over the next few years. The bill that we have introduced increases the total amount to 50,000 detention beds. Still, that is not enough to detain everyone who comes across the border illegally. That is where expedited removal comes into play--a process to remove aliens quickly so that we reduce the need for bed space.

Our bill also increases penalties for alien smuggling, document fraud, and gang violence by aliens. We know, as I said a moment ago, that the nature of the people coming across our border, through our porous southern border, has changed. We are seeing many people who are violent gang members coming from places in Central America. We know that people are coming from Asia and from Europe, all around the world, and they are transiting through Mexico.

Alien smugglers are the people that make that happen. We have learned that they consider human beings to be just another commodity. They are just as likely to smuggle arms, drugs or anything else that will make them money. We need to make sure that we crack down on these alien smugglers that facilitate this intrusion into our country illegally and show that we are committed to tough punishment. Our bill accomplishes that.

We provide greater tools for the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of State to require that countries accept their own citizens back if they violate our immigration laws and they come into our country illegally.

Our bill also clarifies the authority of State and local officials to enforce immigration laws and authorizes the reimbursement of local and State officials for costs they incur in enforcing Federal immigration law.

Recently, I traveled to Victoria, TX, and met with a group of sheriffs down there. It so happened that the Minutemen who first organized in Arizona were organizing in Goliad, TX, and local law enforcement officials were concerned about having these citizen volunteers engage in what essentially is a law enforcement process. They said to me:

If the Federal Government would provide us additional resources, we would be glad to help. We need some training, but we would be glad to be cross-designated, if that is important, to enforce both Federal immigration laws as well as State and local laws. We would be glad to detain them in our local jail facilities pending their hearings, if necessary, but it is going to take a little help from the Federal Government.

I told them that I welcomed their offer to assist because I believe interior enforcement performed by many of these local law enforcement officials is an important part of this puzzle.

Our bill also creates a new senior-level position at the Department of Justice committed to immigration enforcement.

The third piece of the enforcement puzzle deals with the employment of undocumented immigrants. The Congressional Research Service estimates that out of the roughly 10 million people who have come into our country in violation of our laws, about 6 million are currently in the workforce. I believe that a vast majority of employers simply want an effective, user-friendly way to comply with the law. In other words, they want a way to determine whether the person who shows up in their place of business saying ``I would like to work for you'' is in fact legally authorized to work in the United States. We must ensure that we provide them an efficient, easy-to-use system that is airtight.

The example I often use is the following: if I show up at a convenience store and buy something, I can present my debit card or Visa or Master Card. In a matter of seconds, the clerk can swipe the card and it can authorize that purchase using modern technology. Why can we not use something similar--maybe with a few more bells and whistles--to allow employers to determine whether a person they want to hire is in fact eligible to work?

Since 1996, the Government has been testing an electronic verification system that provides instantaneous confirmation of an individual's authorization to work in the United States. Our experience with this program tells us that it can work but only if we give it sufficient resources. Our bill calls for an expansion of this electronic verification system and requires all employers to participate.

But while we make sure that there is a way for employers to check, we also have to make sure we crack down on employers who continue to operate in the black market of illegal labor. We have to crack down on the criminals who sell and who create fake identity documents and Social Security cards, which can also be exploited by terrorists.

Because our bill will create bright-line rules for employers, companies will be able to know whether they are in compliance or not. That is an obligation we owe them. If we are going to ask them to comply with the law, we have to give them a clear and simple way to do so. Our bill will further reduce identity theft and fraud by increasing the penalties for false claims to citizenship or for filing false information with the Social Security Administration. It requires Social Security cards to be more secure and it imposes standards for the issuance of birth certificates, so someone may not simply counterfeit these documents and make a false claim to citizenship.

Our bill also imposes certain obligations on countries who would like to make their citizens eligible to participate in this program. This would address another big challenge that we have, and that is the development gap between the United States and other countries.

We, along with those other countries, have an interest in ending the one-way flow of workers, which only results in the drain of highly motivated workers from those countries and further impedes their development. Our proposal would not only require the sending countries to assist with border security, but it will require them to cooperate with the United States in bridging the development gap between our country and theirs. Foreign Minister Derbez of Mexico has said that ``[T]he Mexican government has to be able to give Mexicans ..... the opportunity to generate the wealth that today they produce in other places.''

I could not agree more. Other countries need for their young, energetic risk-takers and hard workers to ultimately return home, to bring back to their countries the savings and skills they have acquired in the United States.

The bill we have introduced will require countries to enter into an agreement in which each country agrees to cooperate on border enforcement, to work to reduce gang violence and smuggling, to provide information on criminal aliens and terrorists, and to accept the return of nationals whom the United States has ordered removed.

Lastly, let me cover the temporary worker program. I mentioned a moment ago that out of the 10 million or so people who have come to this country illegally, about 6 million are in the workforce. I believe the fact is many of these immigrants have come here to provide for their families, something all of us as human beings can empathize with and understand. Who among us would not do anything in our power, risk life itself, to provide for our families, even if it happened to be outside of our laws?

We know many jobs being performed by immigrants in this country are jobs American citizens are reluctant to fill. I can only think about roofers working with hot asphalt in south Texas during August as the one example of that kind of job. Whether it is that or picking agricultural products, there are a lot of jobs, unfortunately, that Americans simply are reluctant to fill. We know we have a need for the work provided by many immigrants.

What we provide for in our bill is a temporary worker program. That is something I believe can best be characterized as a work-and-return program, not a work-and-stay program.

Some have said that is unrealistic, that you will never get people who come to the United States to agree to return. I guess we can all have opinions, but I have something even better than my opinion. The Pew Hispanic Center, a nonpartisan, impartial think-tank that looks at some of these matters, has done a survey of almost 5,000 Mexican immigrants who applied for matricula consular card, a Mexican identity card, at Mexican consulates in the United States. They asked migrants to fill out a 12-page survey, and one of the questions they answered was this: Would you agree to work in a temporary worker program in the United States if it was legally authorized, even though at the end of that time period you would have to return home to your country of origin?

By a ratio of 4 to 1, 71 percent to 17 percent, these immigrants said they would. I think that is solid evidence that people who are currently working in the shadows realize that they operate without the protection of our labor laws, without the protection of our criminal laws, and all too frequently they view law enforcement with suspicion rather than as an ally. They are looking for an opportunity to come out into the sunshine and to secure the protection our laws provide.

Our bill does create a new temporary worker category that allows workers who have a job offer from a U.S. employer to enter the country for a period of up to 2 years to work in the United States. Before the employer can hire the worker, the employer must advertise a position, offer it to any qualified American worker, and agree to pay at least minimum wage. The worker will go through background screening, will be issued secure biometric documentation, that they are who they say they are and are coming here to work and not for some other nefarious purpose.

We also create some financial incentives so that the worker, after the period of their temporary visa expires, will return home with the savings and skills they have acquired while working in the United States.

I talked moments ago about the Pew Hispanic survey. Circular migration is important both for the United States and for countries such as Mexico and the countries of Central America who are losing their young risk takers and the potential entrepreneurs, the people who are essential to the development of their own economy.

What economy could withstand the loss of the young men and women, the people who are going to be the engines of those economies and the prosperity of those countries? The public officials in Mexico and Central America with whom I talked do understand they need to have these people come back with the savings and skills they have acquired in the United States, so they can develop a way forward for their own people. In the end, it will benefit the United States because it will take a lot of pressure off illegal immigration if people can find hope and opportunity and good jobs in their own country.

Finally, let me address what perhaps is the hardest issue: the people who are here now who have come here outside of our laws.

According to the Pew Hispanic Center again, about a third of these individuals have been here for more than 10 years. So we do know that some have established roots in the United States, but we also know we have to find some way to transition this population into legal status. It must not, however, create a new path for people who have come here outside our laws. Our bill allows them to get back in line so they can return to the United States in a temporary worker program or, should they choose, as legal permanent residents.

But we do it in a way that is premised upon fundamental fairness. I believe there are many people in America who would be deeply offended if we said: if you come to this country through legal channels, that is nice, but we are going to allow people who have come here illegally to have a preference, and we are going to let them jump ahead of you in line.

Our bill provides a path for people to return to their country of origin and then, on an expedited basis, return to the United States. It will not be disruptive. To secure their participation, it may be necessary for them to know by the time they leave

that they will be eligible to come back immediately once they secure the proper documentation. And we need to address processing delays so that they can obtain that proper documentation in a matter of days. If disruption is the only concern, then I see no reason why the model cannot minimize or eliminate that disruption.

This bill is a comprehensive bill, and I know my colleagues are as concerned as I am about finding a workable solution to this problem. I speak today to share with all of our colleagues, not just the people who sit on the Judiciary Committee and who participated in the hearing this morning, an overview of our proposal which I think has some real promise in achieving results.

I believe our constituents sent us here to represent them to solve problems, not to engage in partisan or otherwise divisive rhetoric designed to pick a fight. Our proposal is one idea about how we can find our way through this thicket, how we can thread the needle in a way that does not provide amnesty. I think our colleagues across the Rotunda in the House of Representatives will be open to discussing our proposal, for it is consistent with their principles of reform.

I thank the Chair. I thank the indulgence of my colleagues. I yield the remainder of my hour to the Senator from Alabama.

I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://thomas.loc.gov/