Howard Berman

Mr. BERMAN

Mr. BERMAN. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment to the amendment.

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, before I yield to the gentleman from North Dakota, I just want to point out that in the gentleman from North Carolina's district, rural unemployment is now 9 percent. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Dakota [Mr. Pomeroy], a member of the Committee on Agriculture.

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas [Mr. de la Garza], the ranking Democrat on the Committee on Agriculture. Mr. de la GARZA. Mr. Chairman, under ordinary circumstances, I would be interested in supporting an amendment of this nature, but the way that we have handled this bill throughout the day, I must oppose it. One cannot say to people, you cannot bring your mother, you cannot bring your father, you have to speak English, you cannot come, we do not want you, get the dickens out of this country, but if you come to work temporarily when we can withhold 25 percent of your wages, when we can tell you if you have insurance for your car and not have insurance for your car, then you can come and work. I can get all the workers we want in my congressional district, and they are good hard workers. But in the spirit in which we are dealing here today, to me it is insulting, it is demeaning. These will be indentured servants in the United States of America, indentured to individuals who will withhold under law 25 percent of their pay, maybe or maybe not get housing or be charged for housing or forced to buy it at the ranch store or the company store. It is bad as it is, but I cannot accept all of the other things that are coming through. We are almost to the point where I am tempted to offer an amendment that anyone who is a descendant of a foreigner has to go back to the country of origin. That is about what we are up to. We even might want to change my name from Garza to Crane. It has gotten to the point where it is now ridiculous. If we have problems with population, we work on the numbers, work on the numbers legitimately. I do not have any objection if we are overpopulated. But let me say to my California friends, if not one more alien comes to California, by 2012 California is more than 50 percent Asian and Hispanic. So, listen to that; 12, 15 more years, more than 50 percent, no matter what else is done. So I would think that we would be interested in seeing what we can do legally. Mr. Chairman, if my colleagues are interested in numbers, I am with them. We have to work on that. But saying they are going to be terrorists, they are going to come blow the countryside apart, they are going to come and destroy the Government, they are only talking about Mexico and Central America, and they have to admit that. They have to admit that. Anyone that does not look like, I do not know, the gentleman from California [Mr. Pombo] and I look alike. But maybe like the gentleman from California [Mr. Berman] then his is OK. If he looks like Mr. Pombo and me, he is not OK, throw him out, send him back. I cannot support this under this, the way that we are handling it.

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Bryant], the ranking member of the subcommittee.

Mr. BERMAN. Under the rule, an individual opposed to the amendment has 5 minutes of time to control; is that correct?

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, as I understand the amendment from the gentleman from California, it is an amendment to the Pombo amendment.

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, Abe Lincoln used to say calling a tail a leg does not make it one. No matter how many times you cite 21 percent of legal immigrants on welfare, it is wrong. Saying it a lot of times does not make it true. The Urban Institute says 7 percent less than the average American who did not come here as a legal immigrant relies on welfare, 7 percent less than the average. Second, you can cite a graduate student who is working at the Bureau of Labor Statistics for a survey, Manhattan Institute, a survey, top economists in the country of all ideologies and persuasions. Eighty-one percent said legal immigration is very helpful to the economy. The other 19 percent said it is slightly helpful to the economy. No one said it hurts the economy. We have put together a coalition on this amendment, with the great work of my colleagues, the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Chrysler] and the gentleman from Kansas [Mr. Brownback] and the gentleman from California [Mr. Dooley] and the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Davis] and the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Crane], that includes the AFL-CIO, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, the Christian Coalition, the Americans for Tax Reform, a whole slew of organizations that believe in economic growth, family values and family reunification. I urge that the Committee of the Whole adopt this amendment.

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Wynn].

Mr. BERMAN. And how much time is remaining?

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I have a parliamentary inquiry. Could it please be indicated who has the right to close?

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 15 seconds. Of the 500 fastest growing companies in this country, 12 percent are headed by legal immigrants. They are, again, a source of economic strength, the creation of jobs, the growth of our economy. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Lofgren].

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Rhode Island [Mr. Kennedy]. (Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 15 seconds. Mr. Chairman, this amendment does not touch title VI of the bill. Title VI requires before any legal immigrant can participate in any variety of public benefit programs, including Medicaid, AFDC, SSI, that you have to deem the family sponsor's income. Our amendment does not touch that particular reform. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Menendez].

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas [Ms. Jackson-Lee], a member of the committee. (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 15 seconds. Mr. Chairman, with respect to the population projections, I just want to remind everyone of the demographer Malthus, who looked at population projections in the early 19th century and concluded that by the end of the 19th century, there is no way in the world there would be enough food in the world to feed the people. I have great faith in the capacity of technology and the economy to grow, and I believe that is going to deal with the particular issue of our future ability to handle the population. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California [Mr. Becerra], my friend on the Committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds. Mr. Chairman, U.S. law does not allow you to petition for your cousins, your uncles, your nieces, your nephews. It would not under this bill, it does not under existing law, and it never has. Bogus arguments should be dispensed with quickly. Second, the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Bryant] says 1 million people a year come in, to show how bad it is. The gentleman from Texas [Mr. Smith] says ``I just got information, 715,000 a year come in. Our bill only cuts by 15,000.'' The gentlemen from Texas [Mr. Bryant] and [Mr. Smith] are right about the number. What they do not say is that for the first 5 years, his bill allows 700,000, and it then has a massive 30 percent drop in legal immigration to far below that. That is the accurate story. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Harman].

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 15 seconds. Mr. Chairman, No. 1, the last comment of the gentlewoman is simply inaccurate. The author of the bill knows that. There was a technical correction made in the rules, and this bill simply returns to existing law. Second, the State Department says it is not 1 million people a year coming in now, it is 800,000 coming in through permanent legal immigration. Third, the gentleman from Kansas [Mr. Brownback] was right, and the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Smith] is wrong. His bill will result in a cut of 30 percent, and a 40-percent cut in overall numbers. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California [Mr. Dooley].

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Neal].

Mr. BERMAN. That is the Condit amendment which amends, but does not improve, the Pombo amendment?

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute. Mr. Chairman, this debate is really about one's vision of America. I think it is fundamentally wrong to take the justifiable anger about our failure to deal with the issue of illegal immigration and piggyback on top of that anger a drastic, in 5 years, 40 percent cut in permanent legal immigration, a cause and a force that has been good for this country; 8 out of 10 Americans polled say, ``Deal with the problem of illegal immigration before you touch legal immigration.'' I hereby reaffirm my commitment to participate when the Senate, as they will, sends us over a legal reform mechanism, to participate and support legal reforms; not these drastic and draconian reforms, but reforms that deal with situations in the legal immigration system that can be changed. But do not make it part of this bill. Build a base for this. Legal immigration has been good for this country. Preserve that existing system. Do not tear it apart. Do not tear family unification apart.

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment. This is a classic case. I was very active in supporting the extension of the nurses program in the 1990 bill. The problem has been solved. A combination of recruitment, of this incorporation of many of the people who came here to work in nursing, all of these things have taken care of the shortage. I have heard from no hospital in the areas of greatest need that need this program. I would suggest that this amendment be defeated. Organized labor opposes this. This is going to displace available U.S. workers. I urge it be defeated.

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, I would just say, we have had this conversation. I am for trying to streamline and deal with the problems and the impediments that exist in the existing H-2A program. The administration is committed to doing that. There would be ample opportunity in the conference committee to work out a program that would be good for agriculture and be good for workers and be supported bipartisanly. In all fairness, the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Goodlatte], did not discuss with us his proposal. I asked my friend, the chairman of the subcommittee, if he would involve me in alternatives to the Pombo amendment, but he did not, so we were sort of left out in the cold.

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?