Securing America's Borders Act
SECURING AMERICA'S BORDERS ACT
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 3217 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Maryland [Ms. MIKULSKI] for herself and Mr. Warner, proposes an amendment numbered 3217.
Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To extend the termination date for the exemption of returning workers from the numerical limitations for temporary workers)
On page 174, between lines 15 and 16, insert the following:
SEC. 2__. EXTENSION OF RETURNING WORKER EXEMPTION.
Section 402(b)(1) of the Save Our Small and Seasonal Businesses Act of 2005 (title IV of division B of Public Law 109-13; 8 U.S.C. 1184 note) is amended by striking ``2006'' and inserting ``2009''.
Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I do rise, along with my very distinguished colleague from Virginia, Senator John Warner--we are bipartisan cosponsors--to offer an amendment that is much needed by small and seasonal businesses across the Nation.
Our amendment is needed.
We believe that it is supported by the Judiciary Committee. But most of all, the American people will agree that this amendment is much needed.
This is a bipartisan amendment. What does it do? First, it protects our borders by rewarding immigrants and employers who play by the rules, workers who come here on a seasonal basis but return to their families when they are finished with their job and go back home. These workers honor their legal commitment to come to work under legally supervised jobs and then they return home. No. 2, it does protect American workers by requiring that all employers recruit American workers before they hire these immigrants, and it makes sure that small business will be able to pay their U.S. workers 12 months out of the year. No. 3, it protects American jobs by keeping small and seasonal business open for business. It guarantees the labor supply that small businesses need during peak seasons is available, when they can't find Americans to take their jobs.
So No. 1, it protects our borders by allowing only those in this country who intend to go back home. It supports legal immigration. It is consistent with supporting a legal framework; it only allows workers to come into this country if they have played by the rules. And you can only come in if you can prove you are going to work for a good-guy American employer who has tried to recruit American workers. Also it does not raise the cap on seasonal workers. My amendment would allow employers to hire the workers who have played by the rules and returned home after the work is done, it allows these workers to be hired for another 3 years and not count against the annual cap of 66,000. It does not raise the annual cap of 66,000.
My amendment provides a helping hand to business by letting them apply for workers they have already trained and know will come back again year after year but return home year after year. It only applies to those who have already successfully participated in the H-2B visa program. They have received a visa and returned home to their families after their employment with a U.S. company.
This is not a new H-2B. It is essentially a 3-year exemption to allow those who have come back in and returned home to come back again, most often to the same employer like employers in my State of Maryland who work in the seafood industry. The H-2B program has kept small and seasonal business doors open when they face seasonal worker shortages that many coastal and resort States have been dealing with over years.
Small businesses across this country count on the H-2B program to keep their business afloat. When they cannot find local American workers to fill their seasonal needs, they then turn to the H-2B. Without being able to get the seasonal workers they need, these businesses would often go under. These businesses do try to hire American workers. Under the law, they must try to hire American workers. They would love to hire American workers. They have to demonstrate that they vigorously tried to recruit Americans. They have to advertise, give American workers a chance to apply. Their businesses have to prove to the Department of Labor that there are no Americans available for this work. Only then are they allowed to fill their vacancies with seasonal workers.
The workers these businesses bring in participate in the H-2B year after year, often working at the same companies--that has been the experience of the Maryland seafood industry about which I will talk later. Yet they cannot and do not stay in the United States. They return to their home countries and to their families. Then what happens? The U.S. employer must go through the whole process again the next year to get them back. It means an employer again has to prove they can't get U.S. workers and that they are willing to pay the prevailing wage for that industry.
Yet, this is not just a Maryland issue. It is not even a coastal issue, though we coastal Senators are hit pretty big time. But it is an issue that affects everyone--ski resorts out West and in the Northeast, quarries in Colorado, shrimpers in Texas and Louisiana, landscapers whose businesses are the busiest in spring and summer. Why is it important to Maryland? Being able to hire seasonal workers for our crab industry has been a way of life down on the eastern shore for more than 100 years. We have a lot of summer seasonal businesses in Maryland, on the eastern shore, in Ocean City and working on the Chesapeake Bay. Many of our businesses use the program year after year. First they hire all of the American workers they can, but they need additional help to meet seasonal demands. Without this help, they would be forced to limit services, lay off permanent U.S. workers or even worse close their doors.
Let me give a couple of examples. One is a business called J. M. Clayton. What they do is a way of life. It was started over 100 years ago. It is now run by the great-grandson of the founder J. M. Clayton. They work the waters of the Chesapeake Bay. They supply crabs, crabmeat, and other seafood to restaurants and markets and wholesalers all over this country. It is the oldest working crab processing plant in the world. By employing 65 H-2B workers, they can retain 30 full-time American workers all year long.
It is not just the seafood companies that have a long history. It is also the S.E.W. Friel cannery which began its business over 100 years ago. It is the last corn cannery left out of 300 on the shore. Ten years ago they couldn't find local workers. They turned to the H-2B. Since then, many workers come each season and then go home year after year. They have helped this country maintain its American workforce and paved the way for local workers to return to the cannery. There are now 190 seasonal workers, but there are 75 people working in the cannery full time, and an additional 70 farmers and additional suppliers.
This summer I went over to the shore, after we had a successful victory last year giving this legislation a temporary exemption, to meet with the Latino women. When I met with these women, I asked them: Why do you come and what does this program mean to you? They told me that by coming year after year--they know it is hard work--they can provide for their families. They know that when they come in April, they will be here until late September when our crab pots are put away and we pack up for another year. During the summer, they can earn money. They earn more money in one summer here than they can earn in 5 years in Mexico. And the money they take back year after year has enabled them to build a home, often dig wells in their own native village, even pool some of their money to build a community center. They come often as a family and often as a village to say: Are we going to the shore? We know Clayton. We know Phillips. They know where they are going to live. There are buses that take them to church every Sunday. They know where they are going to shop. They have access to translators. And in some places, they are actually being trained by the seafood industry to learn English so they can move up to some other positions.
Then they take this money, anywhere from 15, 20, $30,000--mostly 20--and they go back to primarily Mexico. They go back where their husbands and children have been waiting. It is what often keeps the family going. What they earn will pay to build that school, build those homes, clean up that village and is putting the men to work so the men have jobs, the men have dignity. They are not crossing the border illegally. They are building a life in their village. They want to be Mexican citizens, but they know they are here to help. First it is one sister and then the following sister who come to the Eastern Shore for a few months a year to make money so they can take care of their families and communities back home.
This is why this program works. The people who come are part of a family, part of a community in Mexico. They want to build a life in Mexico, but they can do it by helping us here.
Some might ask: Why do we need this extension? The chairman has included a temporary guest worker program in his bill. We need to make sure we do not forget the needs of small and seasonal businesses in this immigrant debate. I welcome the guest worker program that is before the Senate. Once the program is up and running, it will help the H-2B program. But right now we need to make sure there is no interruption so that companies can meet their hiring needs when American workers don't apply for these jobs, when the cap has already been reached. The first half of the cap of 33,000 was reached less than 3 months after employers could begin applying.
What we want to do, again, is protect our borders, look out for American jobs. And for those who want to come to this country and return home, follow the rules and follow the law, this amendment will provide the opportunity to do so. My amendment does all of this. Each Member of the Senate who has heard from their constituents will know what I am talking about. This will extend the H-2B waiver for 3 years.
It is a sound amendment. This is why it is strongly bipartisan. I urge at the appropriate time that the Senate adopt it.
I yield the floor.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. MIKULSKI. My good friend and cosponsor from Virginia is absolutely right. This is a model program. It does not stir up resentment because of three reasons. No. 1, it does protect our borders. No. 2, the local communities are enthusiastic about it because it has kept businesses open on our mutual eastern shore, the Chesapeake Bay, that have been running for over 100 years. The ladies go back home and then return again under appropriate legal authority.
It is a model program. If all immigration policy worked this well, we wouldn't be in such turbulent times.
Mr. WARNER. A further point of colloquy: Last time you and I joined with Senator Sarbanes and others, Senator Allen on my side of the aisle, and just in the nick of time, we were able to get through that extension. It received a modest amount of publicity
I read the articles and trade interests. But I cannot recall anyone contacting my office who was out right opposed to the program. Does the Senator know of anyone who has stood up and said it has taken away work and any of that sort of confusion and criticism we are experiencing today in the larger measures of the immigration problems?
Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I say to the Senator from Virginia, when I was contacted, people didn't understand the program. When I clarified for them that this was not an amnesty program, that this was a guest worker program--and guest was the way they were treated; and like a guest, they went home when they were supposed to--and that it actually kept American jobs in this country, particularly the doors of business open, like the J.M. Clayton Company, they were relieved to hear about it. They were glad we had a Government program on immigration that actually worked. They saluted the ladies for their hard work and said: We are glad they obeyed the law, and all turbulence was settled.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I am delighted that my colleague had experiences similar to mine.
I bring up one single aspect. I happen to be one who really enjoys crabmeat. I know that when so many of our crab houses came to us, they explained that if we lose what little market we have today, we are gone, because Venezuela has entered the market--I even saw crabmeat in the market this week, and I have been constantly studying it ever since I have been involved in this issue. But all of the crabmeat is coming from way beyond our shores. That is understandable now because the bay, which is the principal source of our crabmeat, is not quite ready for the harvesting. I would hate to see the famous blue crab disappear from our tables. It was about to disappear had we not gotten this program through last time; am I not correct on that?
Ms. MIKULSKI. The Senator is right. We have to fight for our market share because the competition is abroad and, quite frankly, they don't meet the quality standard. This program is not only for the crabs, but just think, for the people who are actually picking the crabs, they are putting people to work--the canning company, marketing, sales, the trucking industry, watermen, the people who run the marinas. This covers so many jobs on the Eastern Shore. This handful of seasonal workers helps leverage hundreds and hundreds of jobs on our shore.
We could talk to Senator Stevens of Alaska. They have a business that harvests salmon roe, and their principal market is to the Japanese. The Japanese have to come in to inspect that roe to see if it can be exported. Nineteen Japanese come in every year under this program and then return home, primarily as inspectors. Because those 19 come, Alaska has a booming industry in exporting salmon roe. That is how this program works. Just a handful of guest workers leverages all this.
Mr. President, I support Amendment No. 3217, the Save Our Small and Seasonal Businesses Act of 2006, which would ensure that certain employers would continue to legally obtain the seasonal workers they desperately need. I am pleased to work with Senator MIKULSKI as a cosponsor on the amendment, and I am joined by Senator ALLEN.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I wish to add as cosponsors Senators Warner, Gregg, Allen, Sarbanes, Sununu, Thomas, Stevens, Reed of Rhode Island, Levin, Snowe, Jeffords, Thune, Collins, Kennedy, and Leahy.
Mr. President, I don't know if there will be any more who wish to speak on the minority side. Every now and then, we conform in a bipartisan amendment. I think the amendment speaks of its merits. It meets a need for our jobs in this country. It solves a problem in a practical way. It doesn't exacerbate any of the dark side of immigration. I hope at the appropriate time my colleagues will adopt this amendment.
I congratulate the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Senator Specter, and the committee for the excellent bill they brought out. This in no way dilutes, diverts, or detours any aspect of their bill. Three cheers to the Senate for having an immigration bill that is in no way as punitive and tart and prickly as the House bill.
I think the Senate will proceed in a rational way. We need to protect our borders, protect American jobs. I believe there are sensible solutions for doing it.
I yield the floor.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. MIKULSKI. First of all, the answer is that this amendment will be the bridge until the Judiciary Committee legislation is actually up and running. The H-2B employers will use the H-2C visas you all created once the program is up and running. But it will not be up and running for October of this year, if, in fact, we get a bill. We don't know if we will get a bill. If we do get a bill--you know how sluggish that bureaucracy is in writing rules and regulations--this is a safety net.
Mr. SESSIONS. In effect, it would not continue as an addition on top of the expanded immigration provisions in the committee mark?
Ms. MIKULSKI. The Mikulski-Warner framework goes away when this bill is put into effect.
http://thomas.loc.gov/