Guest Article:  Statement by Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee to U.S. House on Save American Comprehensive Immigration Act of 2007

Statement

Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee

Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship,

Refugees, Border Security, and International Law

Hearing on H.R. 750, “Save America

Comprehensive Immigration Act of 2007”

November 8, 2007

I want to begin by thanking the Chair of this Subcommittee, Zoe Lofgren, for holding a hearing on my Save America Comprehensive Immigration Act of 2007, H.R. 750 (Save America Act).  

Immigrants come to the United States today for the same reason so many millions came before them, in this century and last, from this continent and from every other. They come for the same reasons that many of our ancestors left the cotton fields of Mississippi and Alabama for the factories of Detroit and Cleveland , the packing houses and office buildings of Chicago , and shipyards of Philadelphia and Los Angeles and New York .

They come for the same reason families have always come to America : to be free of fear and hunger, to better their economic opportunities, to begin their world anew, and to give their children a chance for a better life.  Like previous waves of immigrants, they too will wage all and risk all to reach the sidewalks of cities such as my home of Houston . Or Los Angeles . Or Phoenix . Or Chicago . Or Atlanta . Or Denver . Or Detroit .

As we did on the back roads of Georgia and Tennessee and Alabama , they will risk death in the desert; they will brave the elements, they will risk capture and crime, they will endure separation from loved ones.

And if they make it to the Promised Land of America, no job will be beneath them. They will cook our food, clean our houses, cut our grass, and care for our kids. They will be cheated by some and exploited by others. They work in sunlight but live in twilight, between the shadows; not fully welcome as new Americans but wanted as low-wage workers. Somewhere near the borders tonight, a family will cross over into the New World , willed by the enduring power of the American Dream.

First, I believe that an integral component of any comprehensive immigration reform is a component that ensures that at least some of the immigration fees be used for education and job training of Americans. That is why Title VII of my legislation requires a portion of the filing fees for temporary visas for guestworker visas and for the process of earned legalization should be set aside to establish a job training and job development fund.  The fund would be used to establish employee training programs for American workers. 

The training programs would afford a wealth of job opportunities for African American males and other underemployed populations.   The fund also should provide job training for the middle-aged American workers who have been or are in danger of being replaced by foreign workers. The job development fund could also be utilized to encourage job development in low employment areas.

I would also like to address the misperception that immigrants are taking jobs away from American workers. This possibility is greatly exaggerated by those who would wish to gain our support with their anti-immigrant objectives. Among other things, the American economy does not have a fixed number of jobs. Economists describe the notion that the number of jobs is fixed as the "lump of labor" fallacy. Job opportunities expand with a rising population. Since immigrants are workers and consumers, their spending on food, clothing, housing, and other items creates new job opportunities. I expect this to become more evident when we finally get around to fixing our broken immigration system and the over 12 million undocumented immigrants in the United States no longer have to live in the shadows of society.

Everyone agrees that we need to reform our broken immigration system. The only disagreement is over how to do it. The most controversial question is whether we should provide access to legalization for the 12 million undocumented immigrants who are living in the shadows of our society.

In addition to the fact that many of them have earned access to legalization, it is not in the best interests of the country to let them remain in the shadows. Among other things, it is a security problem to have such a large population of immigrants in our country that we do not know anything about. I also know that immigrants cannot be equated with terrorists. Reducing the population of undocumented immigrants who are here to work would make it easier to find the people who are here to do us harm.

Opponents of immigration reform advocate an enforcement-first approach to dealing with our immigration problems. That approach would not work. Immigrants who want to work in the United States to make a better life for themselves and their families must have a legal way to do it, just as employers who need foreign employees must have a way to bring them to the United States . Otherwise, illegal immigration will continue to be problem.

The only effective solution is comprehensive immigration reform. I have introduced a bill that would provide such reform, the Save America Comprehensive Immigration Act of 2007. Let me note briefly a few of its provisions. It requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to impose a 10% surcharge on fees collected for employment-based visa petitions. These funds would be used to establish much needed employment training programs for our rural and urban areas.

It has three legalization programs. It would require the Secretary of Labor to conduct a national study of American workplaces on the exploitation of undocumented alien workers by their employers. It also provides the Border Patrol with the personnel, resources, and equipment that it needs to secure the border. Our borders will continue to be out of control until we have immigration reform that provides more opportunities for immigrants to come to this country legally.

In summary, the Save America Act covers a broad range of issues, many of which are not addressed by other bills.  This has been recognized already by some leading Members of Congress.  For instance, Senator John Kerry added the “Rapid Response Measures,” in Subtitle A of the Save America Act, to the Senate’s Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006, S. 2611. 

The Rapid Response Measures would permit the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security to deploy up to 1,000 additional border patrol agents to a crisis area along the border if the governor of the border state has declared an international border security emergency, and the governor has requested the additional agents. 

The Rapid Response Measures also would provide border patrol agents with 100 additional helicopters, 250 additional power boats, control of border patrol assets, one police-type vehicle for every three border patrol agents, portable computers for vehicles, effective radio communication, hand-held global positioning system devices, night vision equipment, body armor, and the weapons the border patrol need when they encounter heavily armed men guarding drug caravans. 

These provisions are also included as “Rapid Response Measures” in Subtitle F of the Security Through Regularized Immigration and a Vibrant Economy Act of 2007, H.R. 1645 (the STRIVE Act).

Although I am pleased that my Rapid Response Measures are being used in other immigration reform bills, I believe that it is inadequate to incorporate them in only a piecemeal fashion which neglects other important provisions of this important legislation. The origin of those provisions was my Rapid Response Border Protection Act of 2005, H.R. 4044, and the rest of the provisions in H.R. 4044 are also necessary, such as the personnel provisions for addressing recruitment and retention issues at CBP.   I included all of these important provisions in the Save America Act.

T.J. Bonner, the President of the National Border Patrol Council, provided invaluable information on the needs of Border Patrol agents when the Rapid Response Border Protection Act was being written.  His testimony today will include an explanation of why the rest of the provisions from that bill are necessary. 

Furthermore, the Save America Act has provisions to establish a Fraudulent Documents Task Force which could strengthen the fraud provisions in the STRIVE Act.  The task force would collect information from United States and foreign law enforcement agencies on the production, sale, and distribution of fraudulent documents.  In addition to distributing this information on an ongoing basis to where it is needed, it would maintain a database that would be available to the law enforcement community both here and abroad.   

Although the STRIVE Act has good detention provisions to reduce the number of aliens who are detained in penal institutions, such as the T. Don Hutto Residential Center in Taylor, Texas, the Save America Act addresses the plight of detained aliens in a much more comprehensive fashion. The Save America Act would establish a Secure Alternatives to Detention Program under which children and other vulnerable populations would be released to the custody of suitable individuals or organizational sponsors who would supervise them, prevent them from absconding, and ensure required appearances.  The program would be developed in consultation with non-governmental experts in the immigration and the criminal justice fields, with consideration given to the program developed by the Vera Institute and the DHS Intensive Supervision Appearance Program. 

Chris Nugent, who will be testifying today, is an expert on detention facilities for families and other vulnerable populations.  He provided valuable information when the Secure Alternatives Program was being drafted.   He will testify about the program and explain how it would strengthen the detention provisions in the STRIVE Act.

Moreover, I do not think that an immigration reform bill can fix our broken immigration system without addressing the problems created by the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA).  Among other things, IIRIRA established a deportation ground based on aggravated felony convictions, redefined “aggravated felony” without regard to the seriousness of the criminal offenses being classified as “aggravated felonies,” and made these changes retroactive.

Lawful permanent residents have been deported as aggravated felons for minor offenses that did not result in incarceration and were not deportation grounds when they were committed. 

Charles H. Kuck, the National President-Elect of the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), will testify about the need for IIRIRA fixes.  He is an immigration law expert who has had extensive experience representing aliens who are victims of IIRIRA’s harsh provisions. 

Lastly, the Save America Act has provisions that would make it difficult for Americans who are on the National Sex Offender Registry to use our immigration laws to bring victims of sexual abuse into the country.  These provisions would authorize the denial of a family-based visa petition for a spouse or child if (A) the petitioner is on the Sex Offender Registry for a conviction that resulted in incarceration for more than a year; (B) the petitioner has been given at least 90 days to establish that he is not on the registry or that he was not incarcerated for more than a year for the offense and has failed to do so; and (C) a finding has been made that granting the petition would put a spouse or child beneficiary in grave danger of being sexually abused.

Why is this necessary?  I asked the General Accountability Office (GAO) to find out how many Americans on the national sex offender registry filed family-based visa petitions in FY2005.   They found records of 398 American petitioners who filed family-based visa petitions were on the National Sex Offender Registry. 

GAO was only able to ascertain the nature of the offenses for 194 of the 398 petitioners.   These offenses included 119 convictions for sexual assault, 35 for child fondling, nine for strong arm rape, nine for carnal abuse combined with a sexual assault, seven for statutory rape, four for crimes against persons, three for indecent exposure, two for kidnapping, two for obscene material possession, one for exploitation of a minor with photographs, one for incest with a minor, one for sodomizing a boy, and one for restricting movement.

The Immigration and Nationality Act did not permit a denial of any of those visa petitions on the ground that approval could endanger the woman or child being brought to the United States .  Since then, statutory provisions in criminal legislation have made it possible to deny visa petitions if the American sponsor has been convicted of any of a substantial list of criminal offenses.  Aside from the absence of due process in challenging such denials, the provisions are not comprehensive enough with respect to sex offenders.

In addition, as the Chair of the Congressional Black Caucus Immigration Task Force, let me briefly describe what the Congressional Black Caucus thinks should be done.

The Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) recognizes the need for a comprehensive approach to immigration reform that includes increased security, protection against illegal immigration, immigration policies that have articulated objectives and fair administration of our immigration system. To that end, the CBC has adopted four principles to guide its deliberation regarding immigration reform.

BORDER SECURITY:

          The federal government has the responsibility to protect, through border security and other means, against immigrants illegally entering the country and/or overstaying their authorized periods of admission. The CBC, therefore, supports funding for border security equipment, border patrol agents, enforcement and other resources as reasonably necessary to accomplish those objectives.

ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY AND FAIR WAGES FOR LEGAL WORKERS:

All citizens and legal workers in the United States should be assured education and job training, non-discriminatory employment opportunity and a livable wage. The CBC, therefore, supports increased funding for education and job training utilizing fees generated from new immigration provisions and other resources and supports increased funding for enforcement of laws against employment discrimination, wage and hour violations, unfair labor practices and illegal hiring. The CBC also supports holding employers accountable for the legal status of their employees.

DIVERSITY AND EQUAL TREATMENT:

The CBC supports immigration criteria that will increase the diversity of immigration from countries that have historically been underrepresented, such as countries in the Caribbean and Africa, or treated unequally, such as Haiti .

It is important to keep in mind which groups bear the brunt of the bad policy proposals in the immigration debate. They are primarily people attempting to migrate from Africa, Haiti and the Caribbean, Latin America, China , and other regions. While African Americans did not cross the borders to the United States voluntarily, historically as now, people of color (immigrants of color) are scapegoats for the economic ills of the United States and subjected to exclusionary laws that African Americans have fought since slavery.

Equally important, we must not forget who benefits from current immigration crisis. It is neither immigrants nor native citizens, but corporations and businesses that thrive on a tilted economic system that exploits low wage workers, divides people who have common interests with ‘us versus them’ wedge politics, and hinders racial justice advocates from winning policies that promote living wages, economic mobility and equal opportunity for all members of our society.

EARNED ACCESS TO CITIZENSHIP:

Finally, the CBC supports earned access to lawful permanent resident status for persons currently in the United States that takes the following factors into account:

•        Unification of immigrant families, which would include uniting immigrants with spouses, children or other close family members who are citizens or lawful permanent residents of the United States ;

•        Proven employment records through temporary and guest worker programs or other temporary residence programs; and

•        Such reform of earned access to citizenship should also include a path to permanency for the undocumented already here.

We can and should distinguish between those who have come here out of their love for the United States and what it represents and the opportunities it affords for a better life from those who come because they hate America and wish to kill or injure Americans.

Surely, it makes more sense to concentrate our resources on the latter and persuade the former to come out from the shadows. We will not persuade them to come into the light if all we offer is an armed escort back to the place of economic or political hopelessness they fled. To paraphrase Edmund Burke, the original English conservative, we will not encourage undocumented workers to come out from the shadows if everywhere they look “they see nothing but the gallows.”

Why not, instead, say to those undocumented workers who are working jobs most Americans will not take: come out from the shadows and earn the chance to apply for citizenship in this country? You broke the law to come here, and you must acknowledge that you did by going to the back of the line, paying a substantial fine, staying employed, learning our language, paying taxes, obeying our laws, waiting your turn, and earning the right to become an American.

I know that many Americans of goodwill have a different view of the problem and advocate different solutions to the immigration challenge facing America . That does not make them bad people. It simply means we must redouble our efforts to get our message out. It means we need to work harder at rebutting the disinformation that is spread by pundits, commentators, and politicians. As President John Kennedy famously noted:

“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie -- deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”

I think we should welcome and embrace the opportunity to debate comprehensive immigration reform. Truth and right is on our side. We will win the debate if we stand up for what we believe and engage in meaningful dialogue. After all, that it what it is going to take to find the common ground necessary to solve the immigration problem and move America forward.

I thank Chairwoman Lofgren for convening this important hearing on my legislation and offering me an opportunity to summarize the unique and comprehensive approach to our immigration crisis offered by H.R. 750, the Save America Comprehensive Immigration Act of 2007.

Reforming the nation’s immigration system so that it secures the borders, does not lower American living standards, reflects American values, and ensures that our country remains a beacon of hope and opportunity forever is a daunting challenge.  I know this is hard and tiring work. But remember, as the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King often said:

“We shall overcome because the moral arc of the universe is long but it bends toward justice. We shall overcome because Carlyle is right -- no lie can live forever. We shall overcome because William Cullen Bryant is right -- truth crushed to earth will rise again.”

I also ask that proponents of comprehensive immigration not to be discouraged by the legislative challenges we face because the Scriptures tell us that “weeping lasteth for a night, but joy cometh in the morning.” Let us march on till victory is won. Thank you very much, and I yield back the remainder of my time.