Daily Senate Amnesty Debate (Thursday)

Day 4

The Senate reconvened at 9 am Thursday May 18, 2006 to debate S.2611, the guest worker amnesty bill authored by Senators Specter, Hagel, and Martinez. Votes began early and were scattered throughout the day. The following is a summary of the day's events.

For the first order of business, Senator Kennedy offered amendment #4066, which revisited Senator Cornyn's amendment from yesterday (amendment #3965). Senator Cornyn's amendment, which passed yesterday by a vote of 50-48, changed the provision in S.2611 allowing guest workers participating in the H-2C program (Title IV) to self-petition for legal permanent resident status. More specifically, the Cornyn amendment only allowed guest workers to self-petition for permanent resident status if their employer confirms the alien's employment and the Department of Labor certifies that there are no U.S. workers available to do the job. Senator Kennedy's amendment proposed to reverse that by allowing H-2C guest workers to self-petition for permanent resident status without those restrictions.

Senator Cornyn stated that Senator Kennedy's amendment gutted his amendment from yesterday. Cornyn argued that it makes no sense to allow an alien who has worked as little as 60 days per year to petition for a green card, irrespective of economic conditions, irrespective of whether there are American workers ready, willing and able to do the job that the alien supposedly came here to fill.

Senator Specter supported the Kennedy amendment and noted that he opposed the Cornyn amendment from yesterday. He argued that he sees Cornyn's point, but feels that there is a higher value to Kennedy's amendment-namely not leaving the immigrant subject to the control of the employer.

Senator Dorgan stated that he doesn't think we should have a guest worker program at all, but if we're going to, we should consider how guest workers can petition for legal permanent resident status. He lamented that the guest worker program adds on to the number of aliens we are going to legalize and simply brings in more foreign workers. "It's as if the 11-12 million is not enough," he said. They want more. Senator Dorgan said the corporate strategy in the country these days, and the one condoned here, is to export good jobs and import cheap labor. According to mainstream economists, the Senator said, some 42-54 million jobs in the U.S. are subject to outsourcing. Not all of those will be outsourced, but those that stay will be subject to competition from foreign workers. This is just part of the outlook for the American worker today. Add to that the importation of cheap labor through the guest worker program, which is what it would focus on.

Senator Kennedy argued that passing the Cornyn amendment yesterday was a mistake and that his amendment would correct it by requiring the Department of Labor to certify that no U.S. workers are available, but by not making the alien dependent on the employer to petition for the green card. The new language requires full rights for workers. This language, he said, takes the framework of the Cornyn amendment but makes the petitioner show that there is a gap in the labor market that they are filling.

Senator Cornyn repeated that the Kennedy amendment guts his amendment from yesterday. Kennedy's amendment does not require showing that the petitioner will actually be working in a job that needs filling and this undermines American citizens. He opposed the Kennedy amendment and said it is a shell game-it only requires a guest worker to work 6 days per year in order to obtain a green card. The language of the bill should not trick the American people.

Senator McCain voiced his support for the Kennedy amendment. The Senator said it adds to the Cornyn Amendment by allowing the alien to prove work status through the use of valid government documents.

Senator Kyl opposed the Kennedy amendment. The Senator argued that the concept of self-petitioning is new in this context. While the job might exist for someone now, it might not be available later. This allows the alien to say he or she has a temporary job now, but still petition for permanent residency.

A roll call vote was taken on the Kennedy Amendment (#4066). The amendment passed, 56-43.

Senator Byrd rose to speak, generally, on the bill. Today, he said, the Senate finds itself considering another amnesty bill for illegal aliens. After the failure of it last month, he had hoped the Senate had seen the light, had seen the opposition of the people, and would pass a clear enforcement bill like the House has.

Senator Byrd continued by saying that the Senate is on a path that contradicts everything we know about the will about the American people. On Monday, the President endorsed the amnesty and called for the National Guard to be sent to the border. Just a month ago, the President proposed cutting the Guard by 18,000 soldiers. The Governors say they were not consulted. The National Guard may be able to help at the border, but it should not be at the expense of where they are needed elsewhere in the country. It seems to be a political stunt "to look tough." The Senator said that the President would not need to do this if he had supported just some of the nine amendments he had offered to increase the Border Patrol. If they had passed, the agents would be in place right now. Instead, the administration has repeatedly opposed spending money and adding agents, saying it would expand the government. The Senator explained that he would support any realistic measures to secure the border, but had to question such a "token gesture."

Senator Byrd stated that he had joined with Senator Gregg to pass a $1.9 billion appropriations measure for border security. However, the President has threatened to veto it. The President's inconsistency lies at the heart of my opposition to this bill. I oppose it absolutely and unequivocally. "Amnesties are the dark underbelly of our immigration process." They undermine the proposition that the law should apply equally to everyone. The bill is a slap in the face to every immigrant who had to wait abroad and struggle to become a U.S. citizen. Moreover, we have our own problems to deal with without taking on this additional burden in order to help business find cheap labor.

The Senator stated that in 1986, he supported the amnesty bill based on the promises of worksite enforcement. But, he said, it didn't work then and it won't work now. "It was a failure." Amnesties are dangerous, dangerous proposals. Our immigration system is already overwhelmed and overburdened. It only took 19 violators to create the horror of September 11.

Senator Inhofe renewed debate on his amendment, #4064. He said the amendment was modified to accommodate several Senators' concerns. The Senator explained that the amendment recognizes English as the national language. He said he felt this language is more important to the public than it is perhaps to the Senators themselves. He cited statistics that said 84% of Americans and 77% of Hispanics believe that English should be the national language.

Senator Kyl supported the Inhofe amendment and said it was a "positive" thing. He said he hoped this will unify us, like language usually does. The Senator said it was important to note that it was not an English-only amendment.

Senator Sessions thanked Senator Inhofe for bringing the amendment to the floor. He said that while we are a diverse society, we are able to communicate through a common language.

Senator Alexander also supported the Inhofe amendment. He said there were three important aspects to the amendment. First, the amendment does not prevent those now receiving benefits in another language from continuing to receive them. In addition, the amendment provides a clear language requirement for those who will soon be allowed to legalize their status under the bill. Finally, the amendment sets forth new citizenship test requirement.

Senator Alexander said he felt people were lucky if they could speak more than one language, but one of them should be English. He added that it should be no surprise that the amendment comes at this time when the Senate is debating national immigration policy. The amendment is very carefully drafted. The Senator stated that Americans value every language and ancestry. He said he hoped children grow up speaking more than one language, but we must be able to speak to each other.

Senator Graham also rose in support of the Inhofe amendment. The Senator said he wished he could speak in another language; it would make him a better person. It would be great if all children could learn another language, but it is also important that we unify by mastering English. From the individual perspective, he said, you will go farther in this global economy if you learn another language. But from the national perspective we are better off unifying under one language.

Senator Durbin stated that he could not quarrel with the first sentence of the Inhofe amendment. However, he asked, what happens when people go into court or vote or interact with law enforcement? Will the poor with few language skills be treated fairly?

Senator Graham replied that the amendment doesn't disturb services currently being provided in another language. He said if statute requires that another language be used, that is not being changed.

Senator Durbin asked if nothing was being changed, why was the amendment being offered?

[Debate on the Inhofe amendment was postponed until later in the day.]

Senator Ensign offered amendment #3985. The Senator explained that his amendment bars aliens from receiving Social Security credit for work they performed while illegal in status. The Senator said, without the amendment, the bill would allow illegal aliens to legalize their status, and then claim social security benefits for work performed for as long as they have been in the country.

Senator Ensign argued that in order to perform this work, many illegal aliens had to commit document fraud and identity theft. He said not only does the bill fail to punish them, but it rewards them by giving them amnesty. Then the bill gives them full benefits with respect to social security.

The Senator spent some time describing how identity theft was not a victimless crime. He shared the stories of several identity theft victims, one who learned her social security number was being used by 218 illegal aliens. This bill, Senator Ensign said, would only make things worse. He said he realized some would argue that aliens should get credit for their work, whether they were illegal or not, because they had paid into the system. To that, he argued that identity theft is not a victimless crime. Moreover, illegal aliens have no real expectation of ever collecting social security. Finally, he said, it is a reasonable condition to amnesty to require an alien to give up social security earned through illegal work. He said that if his amendment is not adopted, it will create an incentive to engage in another kind of fraud-forging W-2 forms and taking them to the Social Security Administration to claim social security you never earned.

Senator Ensign said we should not reward illegal behavior. It is insulting to other immigrants and Americans. Under current law it is a felony to steal someone's social security number. However, under the bill this is waived.

Senator Kennedy argued against the amendment. He said that identity fraud is a major issue in this country and we ought to deal with it. But for those who have paid into the system and not committed fraud should get social security. Once the alien has met all of the conditions under the legalization program, they should not be denied the funds. Senator Kennedy argued that the Ensign amendment would deny survivors who may be citizens social security death benefits. He said the people we will be hurting by this amendment are legalized aliens who have paid fines and back taxes. The Senator said that three-quarters of illegal aliens pay taxes and most payments go into the Earnings Suspense File in the Social Security Administration (SSA). For a legalized alien to receive credit he would have to go to SSA and prove he was due the credit; the burden would be tough.

Senator Ensign asked why we would want to let the millions of legalized aliens petition SSA for social security credit. The SSA has at least 255 million earnings suspense files. If we allow legalized aliens to claim social security from unauthorized work, all of those files will have to be resolved. SSA will be so burdened with handling this task; they will be unable to help U.S. seniors who have legitimate problems. He also noted that while the bill requires legalized aliens to pay back taxes, those are back income taxes, not back FICA taxes.

Senator Sessions rose in favor of the Ensign amendment. The Senator said he could see no reason why a person who comes in illegally to work and steals a social security number to do it is then rewarded with social security benefits. This bill, he said, gives an entitlement to people who are not properly here. Illegal aliens do not have any legal or moral right to that social security money. Those who are unlawful should have penalties, not benefits.

Senator McCain opposed the amendment. The Senator said millions of undocumented aliens pay social security fees so they should be able to claim the benefits. He said the Ensign amendment was unfair. He said the bill did not promote identity theft as Senator Ensign suggested and that he would be willing to work with Senator Ensign to combat identity theft in a meaningful way.

Senator Ensign noted that Senator Grassley supports the amendment because SSA can't even handle the amount of casework if all illegal aliens apply to receive these benefits. The costs estimates are huge. SSA says they will need 2,000 employees and $1.7 billion in administrative costs alone to process these claims.

Senator McCain replied that this isn't about administrative costs. He said they were trying to give people a path to citizenship and this amendment tries to take that away.

Senator Specter moved to table the Ensign amendment. A roll call vote was taken and the motion passed 50-49.

Senator Dodd rose to comment on the fence amendment passed the day before. He said he voted against the amendment because the amendment does not require any consultation with local officials or the Mexicans. The Senator said that doing this unilaterally may have the opposite impact than the one expected. He cautioned his colleagues about this amendment. He said it will not succeed if Mexico does not work with us on this.

Senator Akaka offered amendment #4029. This amendment, he said, provided special status to the children of Filipino World War II veterans by exempting them from immigration caps. He said this issue had not received much attention, but that he felt it was important. He described in detail how Filipinos fought side by side with American soldiers in WWII. In 1990, he explained, 15,000 Filipino WWII veterans were naturalized under a new law. At that time, however, the offer of naturalization did not extend to the adult children of these veterans. Now the veterans need the help of their children in their twilight years. This amendment would honor these veterans.

The Akaka amendment passed on a voice vote.

Senator Vitter offered amendment #3964. The Senator explained that he had grave concerns about the bill as a whole. One of those concerns is that the bill encourages fraud. The bill provides the easiest path to citizenship for illegal aliens who have been in the country over five years. Yet, he asked, how do aliens prove they have been here that long? The bill allows aliens themselves to submit affidavits saying so. We need to close this loophole. He added that there is a similar loophole for aliens seeking deferred mandatory departure status (aliens here two to five years).

Senator Vitter said that his amendment does five things. First, it strikes the provisions that allow the alien to submit his own affidavit as proof of presence. Second, it allows affidavits of non-relatives who submit contact/confirmation information to serve as proof of presence. Third, it makes the document requirements the same for all aliens who are allowed to legalize. Fourth, it strikes the language that requires the Department of Homeland Security to take into account the difficulties of obtaining documentary proof. Finally, the amendment clarifies the alien has the burden of proof by the preponderance of the evidence.

Senator Kennedy stood up and supported the amendment. He said he was not interested in people "gaming" the system or furthering document fraud. He said that they have stressed legality and veracity. "We are trying to do this right," he said

Senator Specter also supported the Vitter amendment. He said there is no doubt we want the system to work. He called the amendment "realistic."

The Vitter amendment passed by voice vote.

Senator Inhofe again renewed debate on his amendment, #4064. He and Senator Durbin argued back and forth about whether the amendment would affect existing rights to have services provided in other languages. Senator Inhofe asserted that the amendment allows services to be provided in other languages if a statute so requires, but unless required by statute an individual does not have the right to have those services provided in other languages. He countered Senator Durbin's claim that the amendment would result in discrimination based on national origin by citing federal court decisions that held national origin and language were not one and the same.

Senator Durbin expressed particular concern that Senator Inhofe's amendment would reverse President Clinton's executive order that required government agencies to make efforts to provide services and information in other languages.

Senator Salazar offered a competing amendment, #4073. That amendment, co-sponsored by Senators Kennedy and Bingaman, provided that English is "the common and unifying language of the United States." It also provided that the U.S. shall preserve and enhance the role of English as the common language. Senator Salazar said he felt Senator Inhofe's amendment would give federal employees the impression that giving services in other languages is wrong and violates the law. The Senator said that we are stronger when we are tolerant of our differences and that he felt Senator Inhofe's amendment would divide us and points to a problem that doesn't exist. He said that less than 1% of government documents are published in another language and that Inhofe's amendment does nothing to encourage people to learn English.

Senator Alexander rose in support of the amendment. He said that he did not see how you could unify Americans without having English as national language. The Inhofe amendment, he said, does not require the government to print all documents in English and allows printing of materials in other languages as required by law. The Senator said he saw four main differences between the Salazar and the Inhofe amendments. First, the Inhofe amendment declares English as the "national language" while the Salazar amendment calls it the "common and unifying language." Second, the Inhofe amendment strengthens the legalization provision in the underlying bill by requiring an applicant to actually learn English instead of simply being enrolled in an English language course. Third, the Salazar leaves out the language strengthening the citizenship test. Finally, because the Salazar amendment protects President Clinton's executive order, it treats an executive order like a statute. Senator Salazar stated that the Inhofe language did nothing to impact President Clinton's executive order, but that a subsequent President could repeal it.

Senator Bingaman rose in support of the Salazar amendment. The Senator said he thought the notion that you don't have a right to communicate with the government in another language unless there is a specific law is unfortunate. He asked why we want to codify this general rule. He said the Inhofe amendment was not a welcoming message to immigrants who are coming to this country under this bill.

Senator Leahy opposed the Inhofe amendment. He said that while most immigrants do want to learn English, Inhofe's characterization of English as the national language "goes too far." The Senator said that Inhofe's amendment discourages the use of other languages and treats those people as second-class citizens. He asked, "Do we really want to tie our hands? Do we want to deny equal justice?" The Inhofe amendment takes the wrong approach, he said, and stigmatizes those who speak other languages.

Senator Kennedy rose in opposition to the Inhofe amendment and in support of the Salazar amendment. The Senator stated that Salazar's amendment unites us, while Inhofe's amendment divides us. He said he would be impressed if the Inhofe amendment provided resources to help immigrants learn English, but there is nothing.

Senator Boxer voiced her support for the Salazar amendment. The Senator said she didn't think there was any need to declare English as the national language. "Of course it is," she said. "If people want us to say it, let's do it in a way that unifies us."

Senator Reid opposed the Inhofe amendment and called it divisive. "We don't need this amendment," he said. The Senator said he felt the amendment was unconstitutional by violating the 5th, 14th, and 15th Amendments. He called the amendment bad policy and "un-American."

A roll call vote was taken on the Inhofe amendment. The amendment passed, 63-34.

A roll call vote was taken on the Salazar amendment. The amendment passed, 58-39.

Senator Clinton offered amendment #4072. This amendment restructured the formula for how the $2,000 legalization fee is spent. Senator Clinton explained that under the bill, 80% of the money is spent on border security and 20% is spent on administrative costs. Senator Clinton's amendment proposed taking half of the administrative portion and giving it to states and localities to pay for benefits and incarceration costs. Senator Clinton said she wants to make sure we send the message to localities that we are here to help them. They don't set immigration policy, but they are often left with the costs.

Senator Cornyn offered a competing amendment, #4038. Senator Cornyn's amendment added a $750 surcharge, plus an additional $100 per family member, that would be directed to state and locals to help pay for the costs of illegal immigration. He said all states bear the burden of illegal immigration. For example, the cost of emergency health care is mandated, but it is not reimbursed by the federal government. That alone is $1.3 billion per year. The federal government is twice guilty because it does not secure the border and then it passes on the costs of illegal immigration to states and localities.

Senator Cornyn stated he estimated that the surcharge, which would be paid up front, would provide $7.5 billion for states and local governments. Senator Clinton's amendment would only provide approximately $1.5 billion. When you compare that with the 1986 bill, which provided states and locals $4 billion for only 3 million aliens, you can see that is not enough.

Senator Schumer voiced his support for the Clinton amendment. He said it would provide much needed and overdue relief to localities. He said it won't solve the problem, but it will go a long way to relieve the financial burden.

Senator Kennedy also supported the Clinton amendment. The Senator argued that Cornyn's proposed surcharge was an additional burden on the burden. He asked, why not make it $2,000, $3,000, or $4,000? The sky's the limit.

Senator Cornyn replied that he did not see why this was an unreasonable burden when these aliens have already been imposing a burden on our state and local governments. "Fair is fair," he said. "We are not talking about being punitive."

A roll call vote was taken on the Clinton amendment. The amendment failed, 43-52.

A roll call vote was taken on the Cornyn amendment. The amendment passed, 64-32.

On behalf of Senator Kyl, Senator Cornyn offered amendment #3969. Senator Cornyn expressed his disapproval that the guest worker program has been called a "temporary guest worker program." He said his amendment made the guest worker program truly temporary by providing that an H-2C worker cannot adjust status. The Senator said we should have a system that serves the national interest. A truly temporary guest worker program, he said, enhances circular migration, and that helps both the U.S. and Mexico.

Senator Cornyn said he believed that there are certain sectors of the economy that need workers. We can create humane and realistic laws, he said.

Senator McCain rose in strong opposition to the Kyl amendment. Senator McCain said it treats future workers as less than American workers. The amendment also threatened this carefully crafted compromise. Some senators, he said, have been opposed to this bill from the beginning. He said Kyl's amendment would create situations like those in Europe, like that in France where the Muslim population rioted because they had no hope, no jobs, and no opportunities. He warned everyone of the implications of this amendment. If it passes, he said, the whole compromise will collapse.

Senator Sessions rose to respond to Senator McCain. He said Senator McCain tells us that a few "masters of the universe" have met in a back room and that this is the compromise. But, he asked, did they consult the American people? When the American people find out what's wrong with this bill they will be more upset than they are today.

Senator Sessions continued by saying he did not intend to back down just because the bill is a compromise that Senators McCain and Kennedy worked out. He did not plan to hide under his desk. This is not a temporary program, he said. The first day guest workers arrive they can apply for a green card. "I challenge anyone to dispute that." The Senator said he had never seen a bill of such importance that had been misrepresented so grossly. He said the President supports the Kyl amendment. If the Senators vote against the amendment they will need to "come out of the shadows and explain it to the American people."

Senator Cornyn argued that not all aliens want to stay in the U.S. According to a Pew Hispanic poll, 71% of Mexicans said they would be willing to participate in a guest worker program, even if it meant they would have to go home in several years.

Senator Kennedy said the Kyl amendment would affect the success of the bill. He said Cornyn was willing to let H-1B workers, or high skilled workers apply for green cards, but not low-skilled workers. This is unfair. "The Statue of Liberty is turned around tonight listening to this argument," he said. We respect those who do menial jobs. He said that if the Kyl amendment were law 100 years ago, it would mean no Poles, Irish, or Jews need apply. Now the amendment says no Hispanics need apply. He argued the Kyl amendment would return the country to the exploitation of the Bracero program.

Senator Hagel also opposed the Kyl amendment. He said he just got off the phone with the President's chief of staff and despite what Senator Sessions said, the chief of staff did not say the same was true. Senator Hagel said the American people are upset with us because we are not doing our jobs. People have lost confidence in us, but we are trying to find some answers. Do people really believe we are going to deport all of these people, he asked. Do we really want a second class system?

Senator Kyl said the amendment was simple and important. It would make the guest worker program truly a temporary program. Allowing guest workers to become permanent creates a problem when the economy goes bad.

Senator Craig opposed the Kyl amendment. He argued that the baby boomers are going to retire shortly and that we need workers to take their place. If we don't fill these positions, we will find ourselves making other reforms we don't like, such as scaling back social security.

A motion to table was made on the Kyl amendment. The motion prevailed, 58-35.

Senator Ensign offered amendment #4076, which provided a process through which the National Guard would be sent to the border (text unavailable as of early Friday morning). Senator Ensign stated that when he asked border patrol agents whether they could use more National Guard troops as backup, the overwhelming answer was yes. The President proposed sending 6,000 troops. This amendment envisions the National Guard playing a support role to the Border Patrol and conducting activities such as ground and airborne reconnaissance, translating, logistical and technical support, emergency health care assistance, communications, rescue missions, and constructions of roads and fences. He said that two-thirds of the troops would be there in 2 to 3 week segments, to coincide with their annual training. One-third of the troops would be there year-round to coordinate projects and provide continuity. The equipment necessary would be taken down and left their for the various troops to use. It would be paid for by the federal government out of the $1.9 million pot allocated to border security.

Senator Craig rose in support of the amendment and said it was very "doable."

[Further debate on the Ensign amendment was postponed.]

Senator Bill Nelson offered amendment #3998, which adds 20,000 detention beds on top of the 10,000 provided in the bill.

Senator Specter called the amendment excellent. There was no further debate on the amendment.

The Nelson amendment was adopted on a voice vote.

Senator Chambliss offered amendment #4009. This amendment changed the wage rate provided to agriculture workers under the bill by requiring agricultural workers under the H-2A program or the AgJOBS Act receive the prevailing wage rate instead of the adverse effect wage rate.

Senator Craig opposed the amendment and there was much debate between the two over the agriculture industry and how wages were determined across the country. Senator Craig questioned whether Senator Chambliss had accurate figures.

[Further debate on the Chambliss amendment was postponed.]

The members agreed to resume debate at 10 am Friday morning and it was announced that no roll call votes would be taken on Friday. The Senate adjourned at approximately 10:15 pm. Stay tuned to FAIR for more Senate updates.
********************************************************

As you read through this you will notice that many US Senators seem more worried about the illegal invaders, business, and the Mexican government than they do about the will of the American people. This is hardly surprising, however it is damn sure worth remembering come November when 1/3 of these overpaid blow-hards are up for election.