F. Sensenbrenner

Mr. SENSENBRENNER

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2359) to extend the basic pilot program for employment eligibility verification, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 2359, the bill currently under consideration.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 made it unlawful for employers to knowingly hire or employ illegal aliens and required employers to check the identity and work eligibility documents of all new employees. Unfortunately, illegal aliens have used the easy and cheap availability of counterfeit documents to make a mockery of IRCA. Today's document-based verification system just does not work, and it frustrates employers who do not want to hire illegal aliens, but have no choice other than to accept documents that have a high likelihood of being counterfeit. In 1996, Congress created a pilot program to help employers verify worker eligibility. Under this program, the employers who elect to participate in the pilot program may submit Social Security numbers and alien identification numbers of newly hired employees to be checked against Social Security Administration and INS records. This weeds out bogus numbers provided by illegal aliens and thus helps to ensure that new hires are genuinely eligible to work. The pilot program has been a great success over its 6 years of operation. A recent study conducted by the Institute for Survey Research at Temple University, in conjunction with Westat, found that 96 percent of participating employers believe the pilot to be an effective and reliable tool for employment verification; 94 percent believed it to be more reliable than the IRCA- required document check; and 83 percent believed that participating in the pilot reduced uncertainty regarding work authorization. The study recommended the continuation of the pilot. Several participating employers indicated in a recent letter to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hostettler), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims of the Committee on the Judiciary, that ``the pilot is the best tool employers have to make sure they are not hiring unauthorized aliens. Employers have embraced the tools granted by Congress and Congress should grant a continuation of the pilot employment verification program.'' H.R. 2359, introduced by the gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert), would extend the pilot program for an additional 5 years. It would also allow volunteer employers throughout the Nation to participate in the pilot. Currently, the Department of Homeland Security is required to operate the pilot in at least five of the seven States with the highest estimated number of illegal aliens. There is no reason why employers elsewhere in the Nation should not be allowed to participate and reap the same rewards as the current participants. The study of the pilot found that now is not the time to require all businesses in the United States to participate. However, all this bill does is to open the pilot program to additional volunteer employers. The study explicitly found that ``the Social Security Administration and INS are currently capable of handling'' a nationwide voluntary program. That is all H.R. 2359 does. The study did indicate that the pilot could be improved. However, as chairman of the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims will elaborate, in the years since the time the study reviewed the pilot, the INS and the Department of Homeland Security have been successfully making these improvements. At the request of the Department of Homeland Security, H.R. 2359 would also provide that inquires by Federal, State, and local government agencies seeking to verify or ascertain the citizen or immigration status of any individual for any purpose authorized by law may be made using the mechanism of the pilot program. Under current law, DHS must already respond to these agencies' request. The bill merely allows DHS to utilize the pilot program in responding. And, the pilot program contains no new databases. It merely relies on current Social Security Administration and Department of Homeland Security records system. I urge my colleagues to support this bill. This legislation will provide willing employers throughout the Nation the tools they need to hire a legal workforce and comply with the law. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, Halloween is coming up, and I am afraid that the argument used by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa) is designed to scare people into doing something that this bill does not do. First of all, the bill creates no new databases. The basic pilot program relies on both the Social Security Administration and INS database, and there is nothing added to these databases by this bill whatsoever. Secondly, the bill does expand this voluntary program nationwide so that employers in other States may volunteer to participate in the verification of employment eligibility. Because the problem of illegal aliens taking jobs away from Americans is a problem that exists in more than the 45 States that are not covered by this program, there is nothing wrong with giving these employers the opportunity to volunteer to participate in the program. Thirdly, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa) seems to argue against this legislation in that it will allow government agencies to be able to find out the employment and Social Security status and immigration status of people whose names are in an existing database. The only change in the law is to allow the other government agencies to utilize the pilot program database, which contains information that is already available to the other government agencies through existing law. I think if anybody is to be scared by this bill, it is people who are trafficking in illegal and counterfeit documents which will be the sole source of employment verification should this bill go down and the pilot program be allowed to expire. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hostettler).

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert).

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Madam Speaker, I think we ought to put this legislation into its proper perspective. First, yes, this bill expands the pilot program voluntarily to the 44 States where employers cannot get this information. But it is a voluntary program, and only those employers who choose to participate will participate. No employer will be forced to participate under this piece of legislation either in the 44 new States that are opened up or in the six existing States. Secondly, there is nothing in this bill that expands the database or which is the precursor for a national identification card. Nothing whatsoever. I personally am strongly opposed to a national ID card and will not support any legislation that establishes a national ID card either through the front door or through the back door. Thirdly, this legislation allows State and local governments to use the basic pilot program to access information that they can get from the Department of Homeland Security or the Social Security Administration through other means. It just makes it easier when a State and local government needs to get this information for them to get it. If we do not include this change in the law, then a private sector employer will be able to get the information in a much easier manner than our State and local governments. That does not make any sense at all. Finally, let us look at what will happen if this bill is voted down. The basic pilot program will expire next month in the six States that have been using it for the last 6 years. That means that when it expires, those employers that have been using the basic pilot program for verification of the legal employment status of those people that they wish to hire will be forced to go back to paper documents. There are a lot of counterfeit paper documents out there. You can get them on the Internet, and you can get them on the street corner. But now in the State of California, an illegal alien can get a driver's license, which is one of the documents that is acceptable for employment verification status under the Immigration Reform Act of 1986. Thus, even a legitimate California driver's license would not verify the employment status of someone who presents that document, whether that person be a U.S. citizen, a permanent resident alien who has employment status, or an illegal alien who obtained a legal California driver's license as a result of the law that was signed by Governor Davis just a few weeks ago. If this bill is voted down, we would go back to the bad old system of using documents as the exclusive way of establishing an applicant for a job's legal ability to be able to get that job under our immigration law. That would be a terrible tragedy. I urge an ``aye'' vote.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order that section 3005 fails to comply with clause 2 of rule XXI. By addressing funds in all appropriations acts, it implicates funds other than those in the pending bill and therefore constitutes legislation on an appropriations bill in violation of the rule. I ask for a ruling by the Chair on the point of order.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order that section 3006 fails to comply with clause 2 of rule XXI. By addressing funds in all appropriations acts, it implicates funds other than those in the pending bill and therefore constitutes legislation on an appropriations bill in violation of the rule. I ask the Chair for a ruling on the point of order.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of recognizing Pancreatic Cancer Awareness Month. This resolution comes at a fitting time for me and other Members and staff in the House. I recently lost a good friend and former aide, Barry Beringer, to pancreatic cancer. Barry was a remarkable man, a warm friend and a consummate counsel. His love of history permeated his work as a Committee General Counsel. His warmth and gently inclusive approach to difficult negotiations and situations made him a friend to all, even to those who may have disagreed with him. His pure motives earned him universal respect and admiration from his friends and colleagues. Barry served as my General Counsel during my tenure as Chairman of the House Science Committee. His sage advice, thoughtful perspective, and his respect for the history of the institution guided many a decision. His counsel was invaluable and will be missed greatly not only by me but by all who worked with him and around him. His warm humor and collegial approach to everything is unique in this institution . . . and will be missed. In addition to being a loving husband and father, Barry was a loving human being who left us all richer for having known and worked with him. Congressman Platts introduced this important resolution to raise awareness of pancreatic cancer. Unfortunately, no one knows the exact causes of pancreatic cancer. Doctors are rarely able to explain why one person gets pancreatic cancer and another does not. I am pleased that the House is acknowledging this deadly disease and raising awareness of pancreatic cancer so others may not suffer the same fate as my friend Barry.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. King).

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh), who is the principal author of this bill.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2655 would extend the Irish Peace Process Cultural and Training Program for 2 years, from 2006 to 2008. It would also modify the provisions of the program to ensure that those aliens receiving visas are those the program was designed to benefit. In 1998, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh) guided the Irish Peace Process Cultural and Training Program Act to enactment. The purpose of this program is to allow young adults who live in disadvantaged areas of Northern Ireland and designated border counties of the Irish Republic that are suffering from sectarian violence and high unemployment to enter the United States to develop job skills and conflict resolution abilities in a diverse, cooperative, peaceful and prosperous environment. They can then return to their homes better able to contribute toward economic regeneration and the Irish peace process. Up to 4,000 qualifying aliens, and their spouses and minor children, can be admitted each year, and they can stay in the United States for up to 3 years. The program was set to sunset on October 1, 2005. In the 107th Congress, this program was extended until October 1, 2006. The bill of the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh), H.R. 2655, would extend the program for another 2 years until October 1, 2008. It would also make a number of changes to the program to ensure that the aliens granted admission are truly the economically disadvantaged young adults the program was designed to help. These changes include requirements that program participants not have degrees from institutions of higher education; that they be at least 21 years of age; that they be nationals of the United Kingdom or the Republic of Ireland; and that they have been unemployed and resident in Northern Ireland or the designated border counties for at least 6 months. The bill would also make changes to the program to help ensure that the aliens return to Ireland to foster economic development and peace. The bill would reduce the duration of the visa term from 3 years to 2 years, and this change would discourage visa holders from remaining in the United States by reducing the amount of time they would have to establish roots here. The bill would also require that aliens admitted under this program return home for 2 years before they could apply for an immigrant visa, permanent residence, or another nonimmigrant visa. I urge my colleagues to vote for this bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2655) to amend and extend the Irish Peace Process Cultural and Training Program Act of 1998, as amended.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time as well.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. LaHood).

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson).

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, introduced by the gentleman from California (Mr. Issa), House Resolution 234 condemns bigotry and violence against individuals of Arab, Muslim, South Asian and Sikh-Americans dissent. It was introduced in response to concerns about an increase in discriminatory backlash crimes following the commencement of military action in Iraq in March 2003. Specifically, House Resolution 234 recognizes the many contributions of Arab-, Muslim-, South Asian-, and Sikh-Americans to our culture and society, calls upon law enforcement authorities to work to vigorously prevent, investigate and prosecute discriminatory backlash crimes, and reaffirms the House of Representatives' commitment to assuring that the civil rights and civil liberties of all Americans are protected. The weeks and months following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, saw a significant increase in the number of crimes committed against those perceived to be of Arab- Muslim-, South Asian-, and Sikh- American dessent. Take, for example, the FBI's hate crime statistics for 2001. According to this report, the number of anti-Islamic incidents grew 1,600 percent between 2000 and 2001 taking such incidents from the second-least reported category of reported religious-bias incidents in 2000 of the second-highest reported category of religious-bias incidents in 2001. The oversight work of the Subcommittee on the Constitution has revealed a significant effort on the part of the Department of Justice to address this alarming increase in discriminatory backlash crimes. Shortly after the September 2001 terrorist attacks, former Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division, Ralph Boyd, instructed the U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division's National Origin Working Group to help combat violations of federal civil rights laws involving individuals perceived to be of Arab-, Muslim-, South Asian-, or Sikh-American origin. Specifically, the Working Group now receives reports of violations based upon national origin, citizenship status, and religion; conducts outreach to vulnerable communities; and works with other Civil Rights Division components and governmental agencies to ensure accurate referral, effective outreach, and provision of services to victims of civil rights violations. In addition, the Civil Rights Division continues to spearhead the criminal investigations and prosecutions of hundreds of backlash crimes. In April, Attorney General John Ashcroft announced that approximately 400 incidents of backlash discrimination have been investigated since September 2001 by the Civil Rights Division, the FBI and the U.S. Attorneys' Offices. Of these investigations, approximately 70 State and local criminal prosecutions were initiated and Federal charges were brought in ten cases. It is my hope that the Civil Rights Division continues to vigilantly investigate and prosecute those crimes. Similar to House Concurrent Resolution 227, which was approved by the House just days after the terrorist attacks of 2001, House Resolution 234 will again express this body's appreciation for the contributions of Arab-, Mus- lim-, South Asian-, and Sikh-Americans to the Nation and condemnation of all actions of bigotry and violence towards such individuals. I applaud the gentleman from California (Mr. Issa) for his leadership on this issue and urge my colleagues to strongly support this resolution. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 234) condemning bigotry and violence against Arab-Americans, Muslim-Americans, South Asian-Americans, and Sikh- Americans.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H. Res. 234.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith) who is the chairman of the Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property of the Committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1303 amends the E-Government Act to require the Judicial Conference of the United States to promulgate national rules to address privacy and security concerns relating to the electronic filing of court documents and the public availability of documents filed electronically. To the extent any rules provide for the redaction of certain information in order to protect privacy, this bill requires that the rules allow litigants to file and access unredacted documents under seal for evidentiary purposes in addition to a redacted version for public use. H.R. 1303 addresses the concerns of both the Department of Justice and the judiciary. The Department of Justice was concerned that the privacy policy of the Judicial Conference could impede the legal introduction into evidence of information it deemed necessary to prove the elements of certain cases, such as bank account numbers in a fraud prosecution. The judiciary was concerned that a privacy policy allowing parties to file unredacted and sealed documents and a redacted public version could result in confusion, error, privacy risks, and reduction in access to public documents. H.R. 1303 requires the enactment of national rules to protect privacy and security concerns. However, such rules permit the filing of one ``reference list,'' to be kept under seal, that would include a complete version of each personal data identifier and a corresponding partially redacted version of each identifier. Only the partially redacted version may be used in future filings. The bill encourages uniformity in all jurisdictions and empowers and Department of Justice to access the information necessary to prosecute crimes. The Judicial Conference will retain the authority to enact rules that comply with case law, provide the greatest public access to information possible, and protect the privacy of all participants in the Federal judicial system. This is a good bill and I urge my colleagues to support it. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 1303 currently under consideration.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1303) to Amend the E-Government Act of 2002 with respect to rulemaking authority of the Judicial Conference, as amended.