[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 189 (Tuesday, December 6, 2022)]
[House]
[Pages H8759-H8762]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 3648, EQUAL ACCESS TO GREEN CARDS
FOR LEGAL EMPLOYMENT ACT OF 2022; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R.
7946, VETERAN SERVICE RECOGNITION ACT OF 2022; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I
call up House Resolution 1508 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 1508
Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be
in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 3648) to
amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to eliminate the
per-country numerical limitation for employment-based
immigrants, to increase the per-country numerical limitation
for family-sponsored immigrants, and for other purposes. All
points of order against consideration of the bill are waived.
The amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by
the Committee on the Judiciary now printed in the bill,
modified by the amendment printed in part A of the report of
the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, shall be
considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be
considered as read. All points of order against provisions in
the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall
be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any
further amendment thereto, to final passage without
intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally
divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority
member of the Committee on the Judiciary or their respective
designees; (2) the further amendment printed in part B of the
report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this
resolution, if offered by the Member designated in the
report, which shall be in order without intervention of any
point of order, shall be considered as read, shall be
separately debatable for the time specified in the report
equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an
opponent, and shall not be subject to a demand for division
of the question; and (3) one motion to recommit.
Sec. 2. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in
order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 7946) to
provide benefits for noncitizen members of the Armed Forces,
and for other purposes. All points of order against
consideration of the bill are waived. The amendment in the
nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on the
Judiciary now printed in the bill shall be considered as
adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read.
All points of order against provisions in the bill, as
amended, are waived. The previous question shall be
[[Page H8760]]
considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any
further amendment thereto, to final passage without
intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally
divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority
member of the Committee on the Judiciary or their respective
designees; (2) the further amendment printed in part C of the
report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this
resolution, if offered by the Member designated in the
report, which shall be in order without intervention of any
point of order, shall be considered as read, shall be
separately debatable for the time specified in the report
equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an
opponent, and shall not be subject to a demand for division
of the question; and (3) one motion to recommit.
Sec. 3. (a) At any time through the legislative day of
Thursday, December 8, 2022, the Speaker may entertain motions
offered by the Majority Leader or a designee that the House
suspend the rules as though under clause 1 of rule XV with
respect to multiple measures described in subsection (b), and
the Chair shall put the question on any such motion without
debate or intervening motion.
(b) A measure referred to in subsection (a) includes any
measure that was the object of a motion to suspend the rules
on the legislative day of December 5, 2022, December 6, 2022,
December 7, 2022, or December 8, 2022, in the form as so
offered, on which the yeas and nays were ordered and further
proceedings postponed pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX.
(c) Upon the offering of a motion pursuant to subsection
(a) concerning multiple measures, the ordering of the yeas
and nays on postponed motions to suspend the rules with
respect to such measures is vacated to the end that all such
motions are considered as withdrawn.
Sec. 4. Notwithstanding clause 8 of rule XX, further
proceedings on a vote by the yeas and nays on the question of
adoption of a motion that the House suspend the rules offered
on the legislative day of December 5, 2022 may be postponed
through the legislative day of December 8, 2022.
Sec. 5. The requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII for a
two-thirds vote to consider a report from the Committee on
Rules on the same day it is presented to the House is waived
with respect to any resolution reported through the remainder
of the One Hundred Seventeenth Congress.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Carbajal). The gentleman from
Massachusetts is recognized for 1 hour.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield
the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Mrs.
Fischbach), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume.
During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the
purpose of debate only.
General Leave
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their
remarks.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Massachusetts?
There was no objection.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Rules Committee met and reported a rule,
House Resolution 1508, providing for consideration of two measures:
H.R. 3648 and H.R. 7946.
The rule provides for consideration of both H.R. 3648 and H.R. 7946
under structured rules with 1 hour of debate each equally divided and
controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on
the Judiciary, self-executes a manager's amendment from Chairman Nadler
for H.R. 3648, makes in order one amendment for each bill, and provides
one motion to recommit for each measure.
The rule provides the majority leader or his designee the ability
this week to en bloc requested roll call votes on suspensions. The rule
also provides that roll call votes on suspension bills considered on
December 5 may be postponed through December 8. Lastly, the rule
provides same-day authority for any rule reported through the remainder
of the 117th Congress.
Mr. Speaker, today we will consider two bills to reform our
immigration system. Our current laws that govern employment-based and
family-sponsored immigration visas desperately need updates. Estimates
suggest that more than 880,000 people are in the green card backlog
because of how broken our system is.
H.R. 3648, the Equal Access to Green Cards for Legal Employment, or
EAGLE, Act of 2022 begins to address the extensive green card backlog.
The legislation eliminates per-country caps on employment-based visas
and raises per-country caps for family-based visas to 15 percent.
The other bill up for consideration today is H.R. 7946, the Veteran
Service Recognition Act. It improves naturalization for noncitizens who
served in our country's military. It seems straightforward to me. If
you have risked your life to protect and defend this country, you and
your family deserve every opportunity to become U.S. citizens, if
desired.
Now, while these two bills offer important reforms to our immigration
system, I still personally believe there are also other urgent
immigration issues that need to be addressed before the 117th Congress
adjourns.
We need residency for Dreamers, these young people who have known no
other home but the United States.
We must provide secure, stable immigration for agricultural workers
who ensure food reaches our tables.
We should recapture existing visas that have gone unused so we can
really make a sizable dent in reducing immigration backlogs.
And we need to regularize the status of long-term TPS holders who
have been here for decades and are important members of our local
communities.
Republicans always talk about issues within our immigration system,
but so far none have come to the table with any meaningful, realistic,
or productive solutions that would help fix it. They can't get to
``yes'' on anything. They demonize immigrants. They scapegoat
immigrants, and rather than fix the challenges of our system, they use
immigration as a wedge issue.
Democrats, on the other hand, want comprehensive immigration reform.
We are ready, willing, and able to work with anyone who seriously wants
to get something done. It is time for our colleagues across the aisle
to join us in this effort.
These bills today are just the start, and my hope is that we are able
to make more progress on this front before the end of the year.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to support this rule, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
{time} 0915
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the Representative from
Massachusetts for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield
myself such time as I may consume.
Today, we are here to discuss H.R. 3648, the Equal Access to Green
Cards for Legal Employment, or the EAGLE Act, and H.R. 7946, the
Veteran Service Recognition Act.
The EAGLE Act would do away with country caps for certain employment-
based green cards. Unfortunately, the bill we are debating today
changes a carefully negotiated and agreed-upon bill from last Congress,
favoring a Democrat go-it-alone approach that, unfortunately, we have
seen all too often in this body over the last 2 years.
One of the most shocking changes is the exclusion of critical
language to prevent those associated with the Chinese Communist Party
or the Chinese armed forces from admission to these immigration
programs.
When this came through the Judiciary Committee, Congressman Bishop
offered an amendment to add language that once again clarified that CCP
members are ineligible to participate in these programs. That amendment
failed on a party-line vote. We all know the CCP is not a good-faith
actor, and I am appalled that the majority would risk our national
security by rejecting that amendment.
H.R. 7946, the Veteran Service Recognition Act, aims to establish a
program within the DHS for noncitizens to receive citizenship through
service in the military. Based on the title, it sounds like a good
bill.
Of course, those who served honorably in the Armed Forces should be
honored for their valor and sacrifice. But despite the title, this bill
did not even go through the Veterans' Affairs Committee.
Why? Because it is just one more example of the Democrats exploiting
a sympathetic population to push their open border policies. They
should be ashamed.
I will also point out that there are already procedures in place by
which noncitizen servicemembers can be rewarded for their sacrifices
for this country. The Immigration and Nationality Act established
special avenues to naturalize members or veterans in the U.S. military.
These procedures have been in place since 2002.
[[Page H8761]]
Under the current INA, it rightfully does not offer this opportunity
to those who are dishonorably discharged or those who have committed a
serious crime. But the bill we are discussing today, either through
poor drafting or purposeful vagueness, does offer a citizenship path to
those people.
In the Judiciary Committee, several amendments were offered to ensure
dangerous criminals did not receive an adjustment of immigration
status, amendments that included crimes like illicit trafficking in
firearms and human trafficking, and each amendment failed.
Why are my colleagues across the aisle so eager to have criminals on
the streets of our communities?
This bill doesn't even apply to just veterans. It would expand
protections for noncitizen family members of veterans, who would
otherwise be deported for committing crimes. Drug smugglers, human
traffickers, and domestic abusers who never even served in our Armed
Forces would be allowed to avoid deportation because of this bill.
I am also concerned that this bill relies heavily on the
interpretation of the Secretary of Homeland Security. As it is written,
DHS does not have to deport nearly anyone, leaving it to the DHS
Secretary to exercise discretion in almost all cases.
Secretary Mayorkas has done nothing to ease the immigration crisis in
this country.
Do we really want to give someone like that more responsibility?
I am skeptical that an individual who can't even admit that the
border is not secure will treat this increased discretion in a manner
that is required to keep our communities safe.
Before I reserve, I will note that the rule before us provides no
Republican amendments in order, continuing a trend by this majority of
stifling debate and suppressing the minority party's opportunity to
offer changes or ideas to improve the underlying bills.
Mr. Speaker, it is for that reason I oppose the rule, and I ask
Members to do the same.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Let me just say that here is the problem: We just heard from my
colleague from Minnesota that Republicans are more interested in
gimmicky amendments and sound bites as a way to try to get people to do
nothing. I mean, they are the party of ``no'' when it comes to
immigration.
My colleague says somehow that the Democrats are blocking attempts to
ban people associated with communist or totalitarian parties, that
somehow we want to admit them into this country. Well, here is the
reality, and this is the fact, and people can check this: Current law
says individuals associated with a communist or totalitarian party are
already inadmissible under section 212(a)(3)(d) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act. That is the current law.
At some point maybe my friends on the other side will want to help
fix the immigration system, rather than just demagogue the issue over
and over and over again.
This is an issue, by the way, that is important to our economic well-
being. Our business community wants these bills passed in part because
they are having a tough time trying to fill current jobs.
So we can demagogue the issue, and if that is what you want to do,
fine; or you can actually legislate and get something done.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I want to comment on the so-called gimmicky amendments. I don't see
it as gimmicky when we are trying to stop criminals from staying in our
country. I don't see it as gimmicky when we are trying to stop human
traffickers. I don't see it as gimmicky when we are trying to stop
those who have trafficked firearms. I don't see that as gimmicky. I see
that as trying to protect the people of the country and making sure
that we do not allow criminals to continue to stay in our country.
As for the issue of current law, if it is the case that those
associated with the CCP are already not allowed under current law, then
there is no issue to just put this in the bill just in case and make
sure that we have satisfied the concerns of people who are concerned
about allowing those CCP members into the country.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, again, on traffickers and gun smugglers,
and you name it, those things are already illegal, but whatever. It is
not worth getting into it.
Mr. Speaker, I have no other speakers on my side, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I yield
myself the balance of my time.
This majority all too often uses flowery titles to mask the bill's
true meaning. The Veteran Service Recognition Act is another one of
these examples. It leads the public to believe we are looking at a bill
that would recognize the service of our veterans. But once again, when
you take a closer look, it becomes painfully clear that this is another
push for open borders. This bill intends to pave a far broader pathway
to citizenship not just for veterans. A path already exists for
veterans since 2002, but this bill opens a path to criminals, something
Democrats rejected every opportunity they had to keep criminals out of
the program.
In just 2 short years, the American people have watched as the
situation at the southern border has deteriorated into nothing short of
a crisis. I would have hoped that my colleagues would treat this
situation a little more seriously, but unfortunately, I have come to
expect nothing less.
This bill is just one more example of how deeply unserious my
colleagues in the majority are of addressing the disaster at our
southern border. I oppose this rule, and I ask Members to do the same.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Let me remind all my colleagues that the Veteran Service Recognition
Act is actually supported by the American Legion, one of our leading
veterans' organizations in this country, but I guess that is not enough
for some of my Republican colleagues again saying ``no'' to everything.
Mr. Speaker, the EAGLE Act and the Veteran Service Recognition Act
provide necessary reforms that will improve our immigration system. I
know so much more can be done--as I said before, we need to do more--
but these two bills are small steps that we can take now to help clear
backlogs and ensure that those who not only have played by the rules,
but have sacrificed in the service of our Nation can become citizens.
They are important policies that should become law.
I read today that some of my friends on the other side of the aisle
are urging their next leader--I don't know who it will be--to use the
debt ceiling not only to cut Social Security and Medicare and a whole
bunch of other programs that are vital, including nutrition programs,
but they want to use it as leverage to go after immigrants to mess up
our immigration system even more. What a rotten way to legislate, to
use the debt ceiling as an excuse to try to derail government.
We already know what the Republicans are capable of doing. The last
time they were in charge of the House and the Senate and the White
House, they shut the government down and they left. That is their idea
of responsible governing.
Well, we shouldn't be using the debt ceiling as leverage. We should
actually be paying our bills that we have accumulated. If you don't
like the spending--I didn't like Donald Trump's tax cut that benefited
mostly wealthy people in this country; I nonetheless voted to increase
the debt ceiling because we had accumulated all of that debt because of
that terrible tax cut geared to the rich. It is the responsible thing
to do. It really is kind of disturbing to hear some of the priorities
of my Republican friends.
As I said before, their policy on immigration has been consistent.
Demagogue, demagogue, demagogue. Fix nothing. They blame immigrants for
everything. It is raining out today; they will blame immigrants. Having
a fight with their spouse; well, it must be the fault of immigrants.
Having a bad day; let's blame immigrants. That is their MO. That is
what they have done,
[[Page H8762]]
and it really is offensive. It betrays the highest values of this
country.
The two bills before us are modest. There is much more we need to do.
As I said, we need to help the Dreamers. We need to fix the issue for
our TPS holders. We owe that to them.
Mr. Speaker, let me close by saying that we are going to spend the
next few weeks legislating and delivering for the American people, and
I urge some of my colleagues to join with us in getting things done, or
they can simply do what they usually do and complain and complain and
demagogue and demagogue.
Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule and on the previous
question.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I
move the previous question on the resolution.
The previous question was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on adoption of the
resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on
this question are postponed.
____________________