Speech #1100055709

We have not been able to suirvey the sex offender registry laws of all 50 States. We know there is at least one StateNew Yorkwhere firsttime failure to register a conviction is a class A misdemeanor. punishable by up to 1 year. My simple question is: Why would we want to employ a loophole for sex offenders and allow them to gain the benefits under this bill by being eligible for a Z visa. with a path to legal permanent residency. potentially. and American citizenship? My amendment makes clearunlike the Kennedy amendmentthat all these loopholes are closed and this is not possible. I cannot imagine that the American people would feel. among the many other people who are arguably worthy of gaining benefits under this bill. we would want to demean what we are doing here by providing these benefits to people who so clearly have shown themselves unworthy of getting those benefits. I will point out that I know we have had a big debate in this country and in the Senate about what constitutes amnesty. I think the problem is the American peoplemany of themdont feel we are serious about restoring the rule of law when it comes to our broken immigration system. I dont mean for a minute to impugn the good faith of Senators who have labored long and hard to try to bring this bill to the floor. and those of us who are trying to improve it. to make it better. But by way of example. these are the sorts of offenses that ordinarily would be punishable under our laws but which are completely ignored when it comes to applicants for a Z visaand that is the 12 million or so who are herewho have committed these acts. Anyone who has entered the country without being inspected or admitted:. that is. who came across the border before January 1. 2007. this bill would make eligible for a Z visa. Any alien who failed to show up for his or her removal proceeding without just cause would be eligible for legal status under this bill. Any alien. that is. any noncitizen. who. through fraud or willful misrepresentation. got a visa or other document or admitted to the United States would be eligible for a Z visa. Any individual who makes a false claim to U.S. citizenshipthis is an independent offense against our criminal laws--would be eligible for a Z visa. Any noncitizen who was a stowaway who made their way into the United States. anyone who is the subject of a civil penalty for document fraud would be eligible under this bill for legalization and a Z visa. Any alien who. when trying to enter the country. did not have the proper documents. visa. passport. bordercrossing card. et cetera. any alien who remained unlawfully in the United States for less than a year. left the United States before removal. and then tried to reenter in a 3year period would be eligible for a Z visa under this bill. or was in the United States unlawfully continuously for more than a year. then tried to reenter the United States within 10 years after leaving or being removed from the United States. It gets a little convoluted. but that person would be eligible for a Z visa or legalization and potentially a path to legal permanent residency and American citizenship. Under this bill. any alien who. after previously violating immigration laws. for example. crossed the border multiple times and remained unlawfully in the United States for an aggregate of a year or more under this bill would be eligible for legalization under a Z visa. potentially eligible for legal permanent residency and American citizenship. Any alien who came with another alien who is not admissible to the United States who is certified as helpless due to sickness. disease. and disability and requires the protection or guardianship of an alien. That is one more example of the kind of offenses which ordinarily we would punish under our laws which are waived and not considered when it comes to eligibility of the Z visa. I dont think it is particularly productive on the floor of the Senate to talk about what is amnesty and what is not. but let me talk about the more basic consideration and one reason I think my constituents in Texas have expressed such strong concerns about It. It is really exemplified in the debate we are having on the Cornyn and Kennedy amendments. Are we serious about restoring respect for the law or are we going to simply turn a blind eye to violations in the future? What we are being told by the proponents of this billand I believe they in good faith believe this. but it is unfortunate that the bill language itself does not appear to bear out that optimism and hope when it comes to the enforceabilityis that this is. as in 1986. the last time we are going to do this. If we deal with the 12 million people who have come into the country without a visa or who have entered legally and who have overstayed their visa. if we give them an opportunity to get a Z visa. this is it. last time. it will never happen again. That sounds ominously similar to what the American people were told in 1986 when there were 3 million people in that category. Now we have 12 million in that category. So the question people have. logicallythese are not racists. these are not bigots. they are not nativists. they are not antiimmigrants. these are American citizens who are concerned about their country and about being a country that respects the rule of lawthey want to know: Is this going to work? Will it be enforced? Are we serious about restoring the rule of law to our country? I have to say that the sort of fine and requirement that is being required with the Z visa is looked at with great skepticism. Last week. I had a constituent who said: Well. Senator. are you telling me that we are going to allow people who have not respected our immigration laws to pay $5.000. in effect. to buy legal status and then potentially apply for legal permanent residency and then become an American citizen? Who wouldnt go for that kind of deal? That caused me a lot of concern because I. frankly. had not thought about it in those terms. But what causes me even greater concern is the concept that is missing from this legislation that is so important: that is. when it comes to our laws. we believe in the role of deterrence. In other words. when we provide a penalty to somebody for violating the law. one of the considerations is. will it deter people from acting in a similar capacity in the future? I am afraid. when I look at this legislation. it completely omits any consideration of what will deter people from violating our immigration laws in the future. In fact. I am afraid what happens. as pointed out by my constituent. is that it is really viewed as an incentive.