Speech #1100055970

It appeared that little or nothing was being done. In fact. this February. 2007. the Religious Freedom Commission itself issued a blistering report 2 years after its initial report in which it gave out grades. The Customs and Border Patrol Agency received an F with respect to its treatment of asylum seekers. The Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency received mostly Fs. and an overall grade of D. The Department of Homeland Security itself generally received an overall grade of D as well in its treatment of those claiming to be coming to America to seek asylum from persecutionreligious. racial. nationality or based on political conviction. That is unacceptable. Remember it was Congress that originally expressed concern about the treatment of asylum seekers. It was Congress that directed the Commission it had created to study whether there is a problem. was a problem. and now. in this Congress. as part of this comprehensive immigration reform bill. it must be Congress that will fix the problems the Commission has found. That is why I introduced separate legislation earlier this year and then filed this amendment. I am pleased to say it appears I have come to some agreement with the Department of Homeland Security on a modified version of the amendment which I hope will be broadly supported by my colleagues. It implements the recommendations of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom and will improve our treatment of those who come to our shores claiming they seek asylum from persecution. We have made a number of changes to address the concerns the Department of Homeland Security brought to us. I am pleased to describe them briefly. The Commission on Religious Freedom found that too often the Department of Homeland Security was returning asylum seekers to countries where they were persecuted without giving them a chance to adequately make their case that they had a credible basis for their claims of persecution. Often employees of the Department of Homeland Security were failing to even ask these asylum seekers if they feared persecution. as required by Department procedures. before they were removed. This amendment would require what might be called simple quality assurance procedures so that the Department of Homeland Security can ensure its practices comply with its policies. Secondly. virtually all the defense facilities the Department of Homeland Security uses are run as maximum security prisons. and in many cases those seeking asylum in this country. because they claim to be fleeing countries that were persecuting them. those detainees are forced to share cells with convicted criminals in maximum security prisons. sometimes in county jails. This is not appropriate for asylum seekers and other detainees who are not criminals and are not being criminally prosecuted. This amendment would require better Department of Homeland Security standards for those detention facilities to make them more consistent with our best values and the words that are emblazoned on the Statute of Liberty. This amendment would also encourage the development of more appropriate facilities for asylum seekers and families with children. These would be modeled after two secure but less restrictive facilities that the Department of Homeland Security already operates. one in Florida and the other in Pennsylvania. The amendment will also encourage the expansion of secure alternatives to detention such as supervised release programs.