Posted on 05/20/2007 9:50:32 AM PDT by 3AngelaD
Editor’s Note: Sen. Jeff Sessions (R.-Ala.) offered a devastating analysis on the Senate immigration bill in a speech delivered on the Senate floor on May 23. Sessions pointed to shocking elements of the bill that were hidden deep in its text. These include, for example, that the employers of illegal aliens would be given an amnesty for cheating on their taxes, and that under the terms of the law the government would for all practical purposes have to take an illegal alien’s word for it that he has been in the country illegally long enough to qualify for an amnesty.
Sessions also pointed to some of the tremendous hidden costs of the bill, including the $500 billion in additional welfare payments it will cost American taxpayers in the period 10 to 20 years after its passage.
Senators who vote for the bill today cannot credibly claim later they were unaware of the elements and consequences...
The legislation has an incredible number of problems with it. Some, as I will point out tonight, can only be considered deliberate. Whereas on the one hand it has nice words with good sounding phrases in it to do good things, on the second hand it completely eviscerates that, oftentimes in a way that only the most careful reading by a good lawyer would discover...
I would also just point out I will be offering tomorrow, or soon, an amendment to deal with the earned-income tax credit situation that is raised by this legislation, focusing on the amnesty in the bill and what will happen after amnesty is granted, before they become a full citizen. The Congressional Budget Office has concluded that the earned-income tax credit will pay out to those who came into our country illegally $29 billion over 10 years...
I do not believe we should award people who have entered our country illegally, submitted a false Social Security number, worked illegally—I do not believe we should reward them with $29 billion of the taxpayers’ money...I will also be offering a budget point of order...
At the Heritage Foundation, Mr. Robert Rector, who is the expert who dealt with welfare...says this bill represents the greatest increase in welfare in 35 years. With the provisions and benefits that will be in it, he estimates that year 10 through year 20, the cost could be $50 to $60 billion a year to the taxpayers because it takes some time for the people who are adjusting and becoming citizens and/or legal permanent residents to really begin to make the claims.
CBO admits the numbers are going to surge in the outyears. He says it is $50 billion a year. If that is so—and he is not exaggerating the numbers, because that is based solely on the amnesty provisions, not the provisions that will allow 3 times to 4 times as many people to come into the country legally in the next 20 years as come in today, and many of them will go on welfare because that whole system is not based on identifying people with skills and educational levels that would indicate they would be more than low-wage workers—so it could really be more than that. But $50 billion a year over 10 years is $500 billion. That is a half a trillion dollars, and that is why Mr. Rector said this legislation is a fiscal catastrophe...
The American people are suspicious of us. They were promised in 1986, after years of urging the Government, the President and the Congress, promised to fix our borders and end illegal immigration. In exchange for that they acquiesced and went along with amnesty in 1986. They said there were a million, 2 million here who would claim it. It turned out 3 million claimed amnesty after 1986. That ought to give us some pause about the projections that we would have. We have 11 million people here now and only 8 or so will seek amnesty under it. That ought to give us some pause there. It may well be above the number.
... Let me tell you some of the things that are in the legislation that indicate a lack of respect for the American people, really...My staff, working up these comments, came up with a title—maybe at my suggestion—“Sneaky Lawyer Tricks” that are in the bill. I will let you decide if that is a fair description of what is in it...
The legislation talks about title IV of the bill. That title IV of the [*S5031] bill defines the new H2-C program as a temporary guest worker program. Those are in big print in the bill: Temporary guest workers. That sounds like a temporary worker, doesn’t it?...
...section 408 sets out the temporary guest worker visa program task force. So a little further down it has what is called a temporary guest worker visa program task force. So you would think they are writing in this section, would you not, something about the task force. But this, down in that section, this task force establishes the number of H2C visas that may be issued annually and subsection (h) is where the writers of the bill hid the provision that actually transforms these so-called temporary workers into legal, permanent residents. OK? So all the big print, “temporary guest workers,” “temporary guest worker task force,” and then you read in that section down there that it effectively converts them from temporary workers to legal permanent residents, granting them a green card.
It is tucked away in a title that has nothing to do with substance of that matter...Family members of H-2C visa holder need not be healthy. Under current law, aliens must prove that they are admissible and meet certain health standards. Many times, visa applicants must have a medical exam to show that they do not have a communicable disease. They have to be up-to-date on immunizations, and cannot have mental disorders. Spouses and children of H-2C visa holders, however, are not required to have a medical exam before receiving a visa..
The work requirement for a blue card can be satisfied in a matter of hours. Under the AgJOBS component of the substitute, illegal alien agricultural workers who have worked 150 “workdays” in agriculture over the last 2 years will receive a “blue card,” allowing them to live and work permanently in the U.S. However, because current law defines an agricultural “workday” as 1 hour of work per day—the bill language restates that definition on page 397—an alien who has worked for as little as 150 hours—there are 168 hours in a week—in agriculture over the last 2 years will qualify for a blue card.
Blue card aliens can only be fired for just cause, unlike an American citizen worker who is likely under an employment at will agreement with the agricultural employer. No alien granted blue card status may be terminated from employment by any employer during the period of blue card status except for just cause.
Because blue card aliens are not limited to working in agriculture, this employment requirement will follow the alien at their second and third jobs as well. The bill goes as far as setting up an arbitration process for blue card aliens who allege they have been terminated without just cause. Furthermore, the bill requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to pay the fee and expenses of the arbitrator. American citizens do not have a right to this arbitration process..
Regarding free legal counsel, the AgJOBS amendment goes further than paying for arbitrators, it also provides free legal counsel to illegal aliens who want to receive this amnesty. The AgJOBS amendment specifically states that recipients of “funds under the Legal Services Corporation Act” shall not be prevented “from providing legal assistance directly related to an application for adjustment of status under this section.” Interestingly, page 414 of the bill requires the alien to have an attorney file the application for him. Not only will AgJOBS give amnesty to 1.5 million illegal aliens, it would have the American taxpayer pay the legal bills of those illegal aliens...
Under this bill a temporary worker is eligible for a green card if they, in part, maintained their H-2C status. In order to maintain this status the “temporary” worker may not be unemployed for a period of 60 continuous days. This means that a temporary worker only has to work 1 day in every 59 days to maintain status. This employment requirement only requires that they work about 1 day every 2 months.
In this bill, an alien who has been here between 2 and 5 years is not eligible for asylum if they have persecuted others on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. However, an alien here more than 5 years who has persecuted others on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion gets amnesty under this bill. There is no specific ineligibility for such conduct. Since it is included under the “mandatory deferred departure” section, a court will interpret this to mean we purposefully left it out of the “earned amnesty.” I cannot imagine why the drafters of this bill would allow persecutors to benefit from amnesty.
The bill’s future flow “guest worker” program in title IV leaves no illegal alien behind—it is not limited to people outside the United States who want to come here to work in the future, but includes illegal aliens currently present in the United States that do not qualify for the amnesty programs in title VI, including aliens here for less than 2 years. Under the bill language, you can qualify for the new H-2C program to work as a low-skilled permanent immigrant, even if you are unlawfully present inside the United States today. The bill specifically says:
In determining the alien’s admissibility as an H-2C nonimmigrant . . . paragraphs (5), (6)(A), (7), (9)(B), and (9) (C) of section 212(a) may be waived for conduct that occurred before the effective date. . . .
By waving these grounds of inadmissibility, the new H-2C program is specifically intended to apply to illegal aliens who were already removed from the United States and illegally reentered.
The bill tells DHS to accept “just and reasonable inferences” from day labor centers and the alien’s “sworn declaration” as evidence that the alien has met the amnesty’s work requirement. Under the bill, the alien meets the “burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the alien has satisfied the [work] requirements” if the alien can demonstrate employment “as a matter of just and reasonable inference.” An alien can present “conclusive evidence” of employment in the United States by presenting documents from social security, IRS, employer, or a “union or day labor center.” The bill then states that:
It is the intent of Congress that the [work] requirement . . . be interpreted and implemented in a manner that recognizes and takes into account the difficulties encountered by aliens in obtaining evidence of employment due to the undocumented status of the alien.
If these lax standards can’t be met, the bill makes sure that the alien can get what they need by allowing them to submit “sworn declarations for each period of employment.” Putting these together the alien must prove it is more likely than not that there is a just and reasonable inference that the alien was employed. I don’t know what this means other than DHS will have to accept just about anything as proof of employment....
The DREAM Act would ...allow illegal alien college and university students to be eligible for in-state tuition without affording out-of-state citizen students the same opportunity...
There is another matter, another sleight of hand I suggest. Amnesty both for legal aliens who have been here for more than 5 years, and those in the next category who are here from 2 to 5 years, don’t really require that those aliens have to be continuously present in the United States. That is what it says in plain language. It starts off that you have to be continuously present in the United States. But, once again, is that what it really means?
The bill allows these aliens to depart and to return after a brief departure. This allows illegal aliens who broke our laws by entering the United States and who have left and returned illegally perhaps multiple times—and each time violating our laws by entering the United States—to qualify for this amnesty.
I am not sure how these departures and illegal entries can be considered innocent since the illegal aliens broke U.S. laws by reentering. But it will absolve them from any of these multiple violations. That is a huge loophole.
...An alien may not have had deep roots in our country. They may have spent a lot of their time away from our country. But they heard about this amnesty, and if they can get in the country, then they will say they have been here continuously, perhaps.
Somebody says: No. We found out you were back home.
He says: That was brief. I want my amnesty.
We object. I am going to take you to court, or you prove it, or I say I have been here. That is what I say. It is going to be very difficult to prove that.
There are provisions in the bill that deal with U.S. worker protections. The bill purports to protect U.S. workers from the flood of cheap labor that might occur by requiring employers to prove to the Department of Labor that good-faith efforts have been taken, first, to recruit U.S. workers for a job before they go out and hire someone from outside of our country. They ought to at least find out if there are American workers who want the job.
Then they are supposed to notify the Secretary of Labor and the Department of Homeland Security when one of these H-2C workers is “separated from employment.”
I am quoting that—“separated from employment” requires notice.
We heard defenders of the bill say: Well, if you are not continuously working, they will notify the Department of Labor and you have to leave the country.
Have you heard that? You have to be continuously working, you can’t be not working, or else you are not entitled to the benefits of this H-2C provision. The separation from employment notification is supposed to help the Department of Labor and Homeland Security know which people have been out of work, and if they are out of work under the bill for more than 60 days, their visas are supposed to be revoked.
That is supposed to be a provision that makes sure people who come here are really working. Sounds good. But under the provisions of the bill, the term “separation from employment”—you can find that on page 236. As defined, the term means virtually zero.
As defined, “separation from employment is anything other than discharged for inadequate performance, violation of workplace rules, cause, voluntary departure, voluntary retirement, or expiration of a grant or contract.” Furthermore, it does not include those situations where the worker is offered—even if they do not take it—another position by the same employer.
... It is hard to believe—that you are supposed to notify them, except you don’t need to notify them if they have left work, if they left work because they were discharged for inadequate performance, fired, or violation of workplace rules, or for just cause, or involuntary departure, involuntary retirement, or expiration of the contract. You don’t have to notify them...
What would you notify them for, pray tell?...
McCain never fails to disappoint.
God bless Jeff Sessions and his staffers. They don’t miss a thing ever.
Amen.
must read
SESSIONS always lays it out well! He’s the man!
That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
It gets better and better. It should be renamed the’We hate Americans!’ bill.
According to my friends who work in the Senate, the provisions he cites are all in the “agreement” bill.
If this passes in anything close to its present form, then any Senator or Congresscritter who voted for it should be tarred, feathered and hanged. By legal US residents. Sic semper tyrannus.
The voting process is gone. We now live in a serfdom.
This is LAST YEAR’S BILL. Could the title have that info added so as not to mislead everybody? Thanks.
My mistake. This is an article from 2006. The one I’m talking about he gave within the last couple of weeks! I don’t remember the exact day!
Statement from Sen. Sessions in Response to Senate Immigration Debate Announcement
Statement from U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) regarding Majority Leader Harry Reid’s announcement that he will call up immigration legislation in the U.S. Senate next week:
Friday, May 4, 2007
“Sen. Reid announced this morning that he will be moving to an immigration bill on Wednesday. I understand that bipartisan negotiations are still ongoing, but new legislation is not yet ready for the floor.
“Sen. Kennedy and Sen. Reid have indicated that without an agreement on a new bill, Sen. Reid will reintroduce last year’s fatally flawed bill, which seems to be Sen. Kennedy’s preference.
“Dealing seriously with our failed immigration policies is critically important. The stated intention of Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid to bring up next week this extensive legislation - it was just under 800 pages last year - without hearings, without working through the committee, and without following the outline being discussed in ongoing bipartisan negotiations, will be totally unacceptable to the American people who are rightly cynical and distrustful of the Congress on this issue.
“Sen. Reid is squandering a historic opportunity for bipartisan support for comprehensive immigration reform that will actually work. He appears to be allowing the wishes of the special interests that forced last year’s legislation to chart the course again this year. In my view, that is simply unthinkable.
“The Democratic leadership acts like this is just another piece of everyday legislation, but it is not. The immigration bill is one of the most important to come through the Senate in the decade that I have been here.
“We certainly need comprehensive reform of our failed immigration system. But reform legislation cannot be a sham; it must be carefully drawn so that it will actually work. Surely the 1986 ‘reform’ taught us that.
“The good news is that with real effort, the bipartisan outline that has been discussed in recent weeks could actually work. To go back to last year’s fatally defective legislation is truly heartbreaking, especially when we are squandering a framework that could make us proud.
“I cannot fathom any rational basis for forcing this process to the floor next week.”
http://sessions.senate.gov/pressapp/record.cfm?id=273607
This is dated 2006. It is NOT the same bill.
Statement of U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions on Immigration Negotiations
Friday, May 18, 2007
U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) made the following comments today regarding comprehensive immigration reform legislation in the Senate:
“I will not vote for, and will actively oppose, immigration legislation that does not meet the expectations of the American people on important issues such as border security, citizenship, and a transition to a merit-based ‘points’ system.
“I am deeply concerned with the compromise announced yesterday. Both the process by which the bill will be considered in the Senate and the content of the proposal are troubling. Supporting an agreement on such a complex and important issue cannot be justified when legislation has not yet been written. I will be carefully reading the bill, expected to be about 800 pages, to determine whether the details of the legislation have merit.”
http://sessions.senate.gov/pressapp/record.cfm?id=274652
God Bless Senator Sessions.
Pure evil. Great post by 3AngelaD.
ping
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.