Lamar Smith

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Aderholt).

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder). (Mr. SOUDER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hostettler).

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hostettler).

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant). (Mr. TRAFICANT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones).

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes. Mr. Speaker, first I want to thank my good friend and neighbor, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Bonilla), for introducing this important resolution. It is vitally important to express the sense of Congress that voluntary prayers before athletic contests are appropriate and even beneficial. This type of prayer is not an unconstitutional establishment of religion. Rather, it is an appropriate and constitutional exercise of our freedom of religion. It is altogether appropriate before a hard-fought athletic contest to allow individuals involved to offer a prayer that acknowledges the presence of a supreme being, a reminder of the presence of a deity more powerful than the players on the field. Such a prayer can lead to better sportsmanship, fewer injuries, and could even uplift and inspire both prayers and spectators. The offering of a prayer should not be feared. Those who do not wish to participate do not need to. However, we should not constrain the actions of those who do want to participate. Voluntary, unofficial prayers before athletic contests were allowed and even encouraged for decades prior to a mid-1960s Supreme Court ruling by the most liberal court of this century. We are overdue in again recognizing the rights of individuals to offer prayers that can do many people much good. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. 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. Con. Res. 199.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 199) expressing the sense of the Congress that prayers and invocations at public school sporting events contribute to the moral foundation of our Nation and urging the Supreme Court to uphold their constitutionality.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

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

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to vote to concur to the Senate amendment to H.R. 441 that will enable the bill to go to the President's desk and become the law of the land.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, a number of hospitals with unique circumstances continue to experience great difficulty in attracting American nurses. This is especially true of hospitals serving mostly poor patients in inner city neighborhoods and some hospitals in rural areas. H.R. 441, the Nursing Relief for Disadvantaged Areas Act of 1999, was introduced by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Rush) and has been drafted very narrowly to help precisely these kinds of hospitals. It would create a new temporary registered nurse visa program designated ``H-1C'' that would provide up to 500 visas a year and that would sunset in 4 years. Because it is so narrowly drafted, it is not opposed by the American Nurses Association. To be able to petition for an alien, an employer would have to meet four conditions. First, the employer would have to be located in a health professional shortage area as designated by the Department of Health and Human Services. Second, the employer would have to provide at least 190 acute care beds. Third, a certain percentage of the employer's patients would have to be Medicare patients. And, fourth, a certain percentage of patients would have to be Medicaid patients. The House passed H.R. 441 on May 24, 1999. Two weeks ago, the Senate added two amendments to H.R. 441 and then passed the bill. The first amendment allows certain areas with a shortage of health care professions to have easier access to foreign physicians. The provision directs the Attorney General to waive, in the national interest, the labor certification requirement for certain alien physicians applying for visas in the employment-based third preference immigrant visa category. These national interest waivers will be available to those alien physicians who agree to work full time as a physician in an area or areas designated by the Secretary of Health and Human Services as having a shortage of health care professionals or at a health care facility under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs. By allowing alien physicians and the medical facilities that employ them to avoid the labor certification process, this provision ensures that residents of areas with a shortage of health care professionals will have access to quality health care. Language is included requiring the alien physicians who benefit from a national interest waiver work as physicians for 5 years in areas with a shortage of health care professionals, an increase of 2 years from the requirement of current law. The second amendment is a technical clarification to the L visa which is a temporary, nonimmigrant visa. The L visa permits an American company which is part of an international business to make intracompany transfers to this country from abroad of foreign executives, managers and employees with specialized knowledge. In 1990, Congress in section 206(a) of the Immigration Act of 1990 made a technical clarification to the L visa program to assure that international accounting firms and their related management consulting practices would qualify for use of the L visa. Congress believed that this clarification was needed because, for legal and historical reasons, these firms are not structured in the same way that most international corporations are structured. The laws of different foreign countries pertaining to the accounting profession have caused international accounting and associated management consulting businesses to be generally organized as partnerships held together by contracts with a worldwide coordinating organization. Congress made sure in 1990 that these international positions were not disadvantaged under the L visa program just because they were not structured like traditional corporations. The second amendment makes sure that our immigration laws keep up with changes in the global economy. It simply assures that any international management consulting firm that separates from an international accounting firm but continues to keep the qualifying worldwide organizational structure may continue to use the L visa as it has in the past. Accordingly, no new category of visa is created and no new influx of L visa holders will occur. Attached to my remarks is an Interpretation of Technical Amendment which further explains this provision. Interpretation of Technical Amendment ``Collective'' and ``collectively'' refer to a relationship between the accounting and management consulting firms or the elected members (partners, shareholders, members, employees) of the various accounting and management consulting firms inclusive of both accounting service firms and management consulting service firms or the elected members (partners, shareholders, members, employees) thereof. An entity shall be considered to be ``marketing its services under the same internationally recognized name directly or indirectly under an agreement'' if it engages in a trade or business and markets its trade or business under the same internationally recognized name and one of the following direct or indirect relationships apply to the entity: (a) It has an agreement with the worldwide coordinating organization, or (b) It is a parent, branch, subsidiary or affiliate relationship to an entity which has an agreement with a qualifying worldwide coordinating organization, or (c) It is majority owned by members of such entity with an agreement and/or the members of its parent, subsidiary or affiliate entities, or (d) It is indirectly party to one or more agreements connecting it to the worldwide coordinating organization, as shown by facts and circumstances. This provision is intended to provide the basis of continued L visa program eligibility for those worldwide coordinating organizations which may in the future divide or spin-off parallel business units which may independently plan to associate with a non-collective worldwide coordinating organization. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on the bill under consideration.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and concur in the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 441) to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act with respect to the requirements for the admission of nonimmigrant nurses who will practice in health professional shortage areas.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3061) to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to extend for an additional 2 years the period for admission of an alien as a nonimmigrant under section 101(a)(15)(S) of such Act, and to authorize appropriations for the refugee assistance program under chapter 2 of title IV of the Immigration and Nationality Act.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3061 reauthorizes two longstanding important immigration programs, both of which ran out in September and may not properly continue until they are reauthorized. Authorization for 250 ``S'' visas per year, which are used by the Justice Department to obtain the testimony of informants in international organized crime cases, ran out on September 13, 1999, and no visas may be issued until it is reauthorized. Since its initiation in 1994, the ``S'' visa has proved to be a valuable tool for law enforcement. According to the Justice Department, the agency is currently involved in a number of ongoing criminal investigations where the ``S'' visa would be useful, and time is of the essence. H.R. 3061 reauthorizes the program, and also expresses the sense of Congress that ``S'' visas should be used in more investigations of alien smuggling, which is a growing and serious problem. H.R. 3061 also reauthorizes the refugee resettlement program that assists refugees to the United States by providing job training, language training, and other services. The bill creates no new funding or regulatory requirements. It simply reauthorizes two important existing programs. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 3061. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. 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 the bill under consideration.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 3111, the bill under consideration.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the Federal Reports Elimination and Sunset Act of 1995 provided that all periodic reports provided to Congress will sunset on December 21, 1999, unless reauthorized by Congress. The intent of the act was to spur Congress to reexamine all the periodic reports it receives and eliminate the obsolete reports. After careful review, the Committee on the Judiciary determined that about 40 reports, out of the thousands of reports subject to subset, are required for the committee to perform its legislative and oversight duties. Examples include the U.S. Department of Justice's annual report on crime statistics and the Immigration and Naturalization Service's annual statistical report. This bill in its present form is a manager's amendment that includes 16 additional reports requested by my Democratic colleagues. Again, the bill merely continues existing report requirements. It does not authorize any new reports. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the generous comments of the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers). Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3111) to exempt certain reports from automatic elimination and sunset pursuant to the Federal Reports Elimination and Sunset Act of 1995, as amended.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Bilbray).

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would like to conclude by reading reports that point to some of the immigration problems we have on our northern border and also point to why we need an immigration system that includes an entry-exit system. USA Today reported on July 20 in a front page story about the northern border several recent arrests have brought home the possibility that terrorists are establishing themselves in Canada because of that government's easy-going attitude toward asylum, then slipping into the U.S.A. There has been an upswing in alien smuggling and drug crimes. Also the INS has testified that as southwest border enforcement continues to stiffen and the price charged for smuggling escalates, many choose the alternative of illegally entering the United States from Canada. Entry controls will make alien and drug smuggling along our northern border much more difficult. On May 21, 1999, the Detroit News reported the growing problem of illegal immigrants flying to Toronto and then crossing the border into Michigan. A 1998 report from the National Drug Intelligence Center, quote, ``warned that marijuana exports from Canada to the U.S. were becoming a significant problem and the drug smugglers in the U.S. are exchanging British Columbian marijuana pound for pound for cocaine. U.S. officials believe that the vast majority of drug smugglers make their way into the United States without detection.'' ``If we are getting 1 to 2 percent at the border, we are being lucky, said Tom Kelly, who worked as a resident in charge of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency in Blaine, Washington. And on June 8, 1998, the United Press International reported that a joint investigation between U.S. and Canadian law enforcement officials culminated in the seizure of $3.7 million worth of drugs. And finally on August 14, the Toronto Globe and Mail reported that the United States is considering placing Canada on the illicit drug black list because, quote, ``Canada has assumed a major role in the global trade and illicit drugs, and substantial amounts of marijuana and heroin are being smuggled into the United States via Canada.'' Mr. Speaker, I also could go on for a long time on examples of over- stayers and terrorists, but let me very briefly say that two of the aliens convicted in the World Trade Center bombing overstayed their non-immigrant visas. Those convicted in the CIA employee killing have done the same thing. Several terrorists entered the United States without inspection coming across the Canadian border, for example, the individual who was later arrested in New York City for planning to bomb the city subway system and so forth. In fact, the Justice Department's Office of Inspector General concluded that his easy entry into Canada and his ability to remain in Canada despite at least two criminal convictions and repeated attempts to enter the United States illegally highlight the difficulty in controlling illegal immigration into the United States. So, Mr. Speaker, I think we have agreement on two subjects tonight. One is that we want to stop illegal immigration, reduce drug smuggling, and stop terrorists. The other is that we do not want to do anything to impede trade or traffic with our neighbor to the north, Canada, and that is exactly why last year under suspension I inserted language in the bill to make sure that we would not impede trade or traffic. So all this fear, all these straw men, all these red herrings, everything else about that we are going to delay entry into the United States from Canada is simply no factual basis simply because we have language to protect against that. Again, the debate is not about trade. We all agree that we need trade with Canada. The debate is about how best to reduce illegal immigration, drug smuggling and terrorists; and we have expert testimony saying that we have just the proper system to do that. Finally, I want to make the point that when we talk about illegal immigration, we are never going to be able to get a handle on almost half the problem of illegal immigration, visa over-stayers, unless we have an entry-exit system. We are never going to have a workable visa waiver system unless we have such an entry-exit system, and we are never going to be able to have a guest worker program unless we have an entry-exit system. So let us not be fearful. Let us look for ways to implement a system that is not going to impede trade or traffic and that will benefit both countries. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time. General Leave

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.