Speech #980210473

Chairman. I rise in opposition to the bill. and I would like to point out where I feel this bill will end up as it wends its way through the process. We have here a very exciting theoretical merger of two important notions. first. the concept of legalization with all the compassion and humanity and realism that is involved in that proposal. and. second. the concept of employer sanctions. an effort by the authors and by the commission that recommended this original tradeoff to try and have our borders enforceable and to make meaningful the concept of legal enforceable and to make meaningful the concept of legal immigration. But in reality the bill as now before us. in the context of the amendments that are proposed to this bill and which I fear stand a strong chance of passage. presents us with a proposal which I think we will be embarrassed by as it is finally sent to the President. Let me touch on my concerns in three different areas. first of all. in the legalization area. It has already been pointed out that several amendments will be offered in the course of this week to strike the entire legalization program or. in he case of the amendment of the gentleman from California . to go back to the twotier system. a proposal which will eliminate from permanent resident status 70 percent of the undocumented workers now in this country. or. in the case of our majority leader. his effort to provide only temporary resident status based on his own amendments to this bill. In addition. we have a legalization program which is in the bill as it comes out of the Committee on the Judiciary which is already flawed. a proposal which allows the Attorney General or his designee in the INS to deny legalization to people he deems likely to become public wards. What does that mean? In the hands of a moderate administration. perhaps nothing of concern of any of us. but in the hands of a venal administration. a xenophobic administration. we will see that proposal used to suck people into a process. to entrap people into a process of stepping forward to receive their benefits of legalization and in a sense being tossed out of the country. And as the word of that potential spreads and spreads in this communityin this community of undocumented workers. fewer and fewer people will be willing to take the risk. What person working as a dishwasher in a restaurant or as a migrant worker in the fields can be said to be not likely. in that marginal and seasonal industry. to not at one point become a public ward? And what can an administration do that chooses to twist those words? Here is another flaw in the legalization program: The requirement and burden on the applicant for legalization to establish continuous residency for a period of time. in the bill until January 1. 1982. if some of the authors of the amendments have their way. to a much earlier date in time. Does this mean that if there are not the receipts or the demonstrated evidence to establish a continuous period of time in the United States for 1. 2. or perhaps 5 years. that person again is sucked up into applying for a departed benefit and is now deported based on an inability to document a life. a kind of a documentation that few of us could perhaps effectively demonstrate. and that certainly people in this situation will not be able to demonstrate? Turning for a moment to the employer sanctions section. the charge is made and quickly cast aside that this in effect becomes a congressional encouragement of discriminatory practices. and I would suggest that unintentionally that is just what will happen. And it is not because of the racist motives of certain employers. but it is because they are in the terrible dilemma of choosing between incurring civil and potentially criminal sanctions for hiring undocumented workers and violating laws that will be enacted by virtue of this section. We have an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in title VII which prohibits discrimination against employment. Why will this not affect and provide the disincentive to the employer who does not want to take a chance on hiring somebody who does not belong here legally?