For the Relief of Hotaru Nakama Ferschke

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Madam Speaker, as Chairwoman of the House Immigration Subcommittee, I first learned about Hotaru Ferschke and her late-husband, Marine Sergeant Michael H. Ferschke, Jr., when the Subcommittee formally met to consider H.R. 3182, a private immigration bill introduced by Representative John Duncan. The Ferschke case highlighted a little-known provision in our immigration laws, which states that when a marriage takes place between two persons who cannot both be physically present during the ceremony, the marriage is not valid unless and until it is consummated. The provision allows no exceptions, even where the bona fides of the marriage is recognized for other purposes and consummation of the relationship prior to marriage can be demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Last month, I joined Representatives Duncan, Jim McGovern, and Lamar Smith in offering H.R. 6397, a bill that would amend this provision of our immigration laws to account for situations--like the one presented here--where the failure to consummate such a marriage was the result of service abroad in the United States Armed Forces. I was pleased that the House passed that bill by voice vote, but we now must await final passage in the Senate.

In the meantime, S. 1774 provides the only means by which Hotaru Ferschke will be able to obtain lawful permanent residence in the United States, so that she may raise her son--Mikey--in the country for which his father gave his life.

Moreover, as the House is poised to pass the first private immigration bills that will be sent to the President in 6 years, it is worth making some brief remarks about such bills more generally. Private legislation is perhaps the narrowest, most targeted form of relief that Congress can provide. Private immigration bills have long been recognized as necessary in compelling circumstances where the inflexible application of existing law would lead to extraordinary hardship. Such bills also can help Congress identify systemic problems with our laws.

This country has a long history of passing private immigration legislation. According to the Congressional Research Service, from 1936-2004, at least one private immigration law was enacted in each Congress. During the Cold War, Congress enacted well over 1,000 private immigration laws.

This long history came to a grinding halt in the 109th Congress, when Congress failed to enact a single private immigration law. The same was true of the 110th Congress and, until just recently, the 111th.

The Senate's passage of the two immigration relief bills before us today--S. 4010 and S. 1774--is therefore important not only for the two beneficiaries of the bills and their family members, but also for the private bill process itself. Our immigration laws are broken--there can be no doubt about that--and I am a firm believer that those laws must be reformed. But even a perfect set of laws will occasionally result in cases of extraordinary hardship, for which an individual exception to the law may be necessary. Private immigration relief bills have played a significant role in our history, and I am hopeful that they will continue to play such a role after today's important votes.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source